INFORMATION 

TECHNOLOGY

Additional OMB and 

Agency Actions Are 

Needed to Achieve 

Portfolio Savings

Report to Congressional Requesters

November 2013

GAO-14-65

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-14-65, a report to 

congressional requesters

November 2013

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 

Additional OMB and Agency Actions Are Needed to 

Achieve Portfolio Savings 

Why GAO Did This Study

Federal agencies plan to spend at 

least $82 billion on IT in fiscal year 

2014, and GAO has previously 

reported on challenges in identifying 

and reducing duplicative IT 

investments. In 2012, OMB launched 

its PortfolioStat initiative—a process 

where agencies gather information on 

their IT investments and develop plans 

for consolidation and increased use of 

shared-service delivery models.GAO 

was asked to review the 

implementation of PortfolioStat. GAO’s

objectives were to (1) determine 

whether agencies completed key 

required PortfolioStat actions, (2) 

evaluate selected agencies’ plans for 

making portfolio improvements and 

achieving associated cost savings, and 

(3) evaluate OMB’s plans to improve 

the PortfolioStat process. To do this, 

GAO analyzed plans, status reports, 

and other documentation from 

agencies and interviewed agency and 

OMB officials. GAO also interviewed 

officials and reviewed documentation 

from five agencies selected based on 

their IT expenditures and management 

structures.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is recommending, among other 

things, that OMB require agencies to 

fully disclose limitations in CIOs’ ability 

to exercise their authority and that 24 

agencies take steps to improve their 

PortfolioStat implementation. OMB 

agreed with some of the 

recommendations and disagreed with 

others; and responses from the 21 

agencies commenting on the report 

varied. GAO continues to believe that 

the majority of the recommendations 

are valid, but has removed two, and 

modified one, as discussed in the

report. 

What GAO Found

The 26 major federal agencies that were required to participate in the 

PortfolioStat initiative fully addressed four of seven key requirements established 

by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). However, only 1 of the 26 

agencies addressed all the requirements. For example, agencies did not develop

action plans that addressed all elements, such as criteria for identifying wasteful, 

low-value or duplicative information technology (IT) investments, or migrate two 

commodity IT areas—such as enterprise IT systems and IT infrastructure—to a 

shared service by the end of 2012. (See table.)

Number of 26 Agencies Meeting PortfolioStat Requirements

Designate 

a lead 

official

Complete 

portfolio 

survey

Develop 

commodity 

IT baseline

Hold 

PortfolioStat 

session

Complete 

action plan

Migrate 

two 

services

Submit 

lessons 

learned

26 26 14 26 4 13 26

Source: GAO analysis of agency data.

In addition, some of these agencies had weaknesses in selected areas:

• 6 agencies reported limitations in their chief information officer’s (CIO)

authority to review and approve the entire portfolio; 

• 5 agencies did not include all their investments in their enterprise architecture

(i.e., an organizational blueprint), limiting their ability to identify investments 

to be consolidated or eliminated; and

• 12 agencies reported challenges in ensuring the completeness of their 

commodity IT baseline data or did not identify a process to ensure its 

completeness. 

Further, OMB’s estimate of about 100 consolidation opportunities and a potential 

$2.5 billion in savings from the PortfolioStat initiative is understated because, 

among other things, it did not include estimates from the Departments of Defense 

and Justice. GAO’s analysis, which includes these estimates, shows that, 

collectively, the 26 agencies are reporting about 200 opportunities and at least 

$5.8 billion in potential savings through fiscal year 2015.

Five selected agencies—the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, the Interior,

the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs—identified 52 consolidation initiatives, along 

with other IT management improvements, and estimated at least $3.7 billion in 

potential cost savings through fiscal year 2015. However, four agencies did not 

always provide sufficient support for all of their estimates, and they varied in their 

use of processes—such as an enterprise architecture and a method for 

assessing the value of investments—recommended by OMB to identify

consolidation opportunities. More consistently using these tools may reveal

further opportunities for consolidation, and better support for estimated savings 

may increase the chances that they will be achieved.

OMB‘s fiscal year 2013 PortfolioStat guidance identifies a number of planned 

improvements but does not fully address certain weaknesses in the

implementation of the initiative, such as limitations in CIOs’ authority, 

weaknesses in agencies’ commodity IT baselines, accountability for migrating 

selected commodity IT areas, or the information on agencies’ progress that OMB 

intends to make public. 

View GAO-14-65. For more information, 

contact David A.Powner at (202) 512-9286 or 

pownerd@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Letter 1 

Background 3

Agencies Addressed PortfolioStat Requirements, but Baselines and 

Consolidation Plans Were Not All Complete 7

Selected Departments’ Plans Identified Billions in Potential Cost 

Savings Using Various Processes, but Support for These Savings 

Is Uneven 23

OMB’s Plans Outline PortfolioStat Improvements but Do Not 

Address All Issues with Agencies’ Efforts 33

Conclusions 37

Recommendations for Executive Action 38

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 39

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 48

Appendix II Agencies’ Commodity IT Migration Efforts 51

Appendix III Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives 53

Appendix IV Recommendations to Departments and Agencies 62

Appendix V Comments from the U.S. Department of Agriculture 71

Appendix VI Comments from the Department of Commerce 72

Appendix VII Comments from the Department of Defense 74

Appendix VIII Comments from the Department of Energy 77

Contents 
Page ii GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix IX Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency 78

Appendix X Comments from the General Services Administration 81

Appendix XI Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 82

Appendix XII Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development 84

Appendix XIII Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration 85

Appendix XIV Comments from the National Archives and Records 

Administration 88

Appendix XV Comments from the National Science Foundation 89

Appendix XVI Comments from the Office of Personnel Management 90

Appendix XVII Comments from the Social Security Administration 92

Appendix XIII Comments from the Department of State 94

Appendix XIX Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs 96
Page iii GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XX GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 100

Tables

Table 1: Agencies’ Implementation of PortfolioStat Requirements 8

Table 2: Extent to Which Agency Action Plans Addressed Required 

Elements 17

Table 3: Agency-Reported PortfolioStat Initiatives and Estimated 

Cost Savings and Avoidance 22

Figure

Figure 1: Number of Business and Enterprise Commodity IT 

Systems Reported by Agencies 14
Page iv GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Abbreviations

Agriculture U.S. Department of Agriculture

CIO Chief Information Officer

COO Chief Operating Officer

Defense Department of Defense

DHS Department of Homeland Security

EA enterprise architecture

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

GSA General Services Administration

HHS Department of Health and Human Services

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

Interior Department of the Interior

IT information technology

NARA National Archives and Records Administration

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NSF National Science Foundation

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OPM Office of Personnel Management

SBA Small Business Administration

SSA Social Security Administration

Treasury Department of the Treasury

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development

VA Department of Veterans Affairs

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

November 6, 2013

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper

Chairman

The Honorable Tom Coburn, M.D.

Ranking Member

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Claire McCaskill

Chairman

Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Susan M. Collins

United States Senate

Federal agencies expect to spend about $82 billion in fiscal year 2014 to 

meet their increasing demand for information technology (IT). Given the 

proliferation of duplicative, wasteful, low-value investments that both we 

and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) have highlighted over 

the years, it is important that federal agencies avoid investing in these 

types of investments whenever possible. Avoiding such investments will 

be particularly important to ensure the most efficient use of resources as 

agencies continue to be faced with budget restrictions.

Over the past few years, we have issued a series of reports that have 

identified federal programs or functional areas where potentially 

unnecessary duplication, overlap, or fragmentation exists, the actions 

needed to address such conditions, and the potential financial and other 

benefits of doing so.1 In March 2012, OMB launched an initiative, referred 

to as PortfolioStat, which requires agencies to conduct annual reviews of 

 

1

GAO, 2013 Annual Report: Actions Needed to Reduce Fragmentation, Overlap and 

Duplication, and Achieve Other Financial Benefits, GAO-13-279SP (Washington, D.C.: 

Apr. 9, 2013); 2012 Annual Report: Opportunities to Reduce Duplication, Overlap and 

Fragmentation, Achieve Savings, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-12-342SP (Washington, 

D.C.: Feb. 28, 2012); and Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government 

Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-11-318SP (Washington, D.C.: 

Mar. 1, 2011). 

 
 

Page 2 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

their IT investments and make decisions on eliminating duplication, 

among other things. According to OMB, PortfolioStat has the potential to 

save the government $2.5 billion over the next 3 years. Given the 

potential for achieving such savings and improving IT investment 

management, you asked us to review the implementation of PortfolioStat. 

Our specific objectives were to (1) determine the status of efforts to 

implement key required PortfolioStat actions, (2) evaluate selected 

agencies’ plans for making portfolio improvements and achieving 

associated cost savings, and (3) evaluate OMB’s plans to improve the 

PortfolioStat process.

To address our first objective, we obtained documentation from the 26 

agencies2 that were required to comply with OMB’s memo for 

implementing the PortfolioStat initiative and compared it to the memo’s 

requirements and supporting guidance. To address our second objective, 

we selected 5 agencies based on criteria including total IT expenditures 

for fiscal year 2012, investment management maturity level, and IT and 

Chief Information Officer organizational structures. These agencies are 

the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, the Interior, the Treasury, and 

Veterans Affairs. We analyzed these agencies’ documentation and 

interviewed relevant officials to identify their plans for reducing potentially 

duplicative, low-value, and wasteful commodity IT investments and 

determine the extent to which they were based on the use of an 

enterprise architecture (EA)3 and an IT valuation model,4 as 

recommended by OMB, and the extent to which support for estimated 

cost savings was documented. To address our third objective, we 

reviewed OMB’s guidance for the 2013 PortfolioStat and interviewed 

 

2

The 26 agencies are the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, 

Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban 

Development, the Interior, Justice, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and 

Veterans Affairs; the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Archives and Records 

Administration, National Science Foundation, Office of Personnel Management, Small 

Business Administration, Social Security Administration, U.S. Agency for International 

Development, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

3

An enterprise architecture is a modernization blueprint that describes the organization’s 

current and desired state for business operations and supporting IT systems in both 

logical and technical terms, and contains a plan for transitioning between the two states. 

4

An IT valuation model or methodology is used to comparatively evaluate investments 

based on their value to the agency and the cost to the taxpayer using a set of agencydefined criteria. 
 

Page 3 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

OMB’s PortfolioStat Lead regarding plans for improving the PortfolioStat 

process. In addition, we analyzed the information obtained from our 

sources and the results of our analyses for our first two objectives to 

determine whether OMB’s plans for improving PortfolioStat addressed the 

issues we identified.

We conducted this performance audit from October 2012 to November

2013 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Appendix I contains 

additional details on our objectives, scope, and methodology.

Information technology should enable government to better serve the 

American people. However, OMB stated in 2010 that the federal 

government had achieved little of the productivity improvements that 

private industry had realized from IT, despite spending more than $600 

billion on IT over the past decade.5 Too often, federal IT projects run over 

budget, behind schedule, or fail to deliver promised functionality.6

Both OMB and federal agencies have key roles and responsibilities for 

overseeing IT investment management. OMB is responsible for working 

with agencies to ensure investments are appropriately planned and 

justified.7 Federal agencies are responsible for managing their IT 

investment portfolio, including the risks from their major information 

system initiatives, in order to maximize the value of these investments to 

the agency. Additionally, each year, OMB and federal agencies work 

together to determine how much the government plans to spend on IT 

 

5

OMB, 25 Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal Information Technology 

Management (Washington, D.C.: December 2010). 

6

See GAO, Information Technology: OMB and Agencies Need to More Effectively 

Implement Major Initiatives to Save Billions of Dollars, GAO-13-796T (Washington, D.C.: 

July 25, 2013).

7

The Clinger-Cohen Act sets out requirements for capital planning and investment control 

and for performance-based and results-based management. 40 U.S.C. §§ 11302-11303.

Background 
 

Page 4 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

projects and how these funds are to be allocated. For fiscal year 2014, 

federal agencies plan to spend about $82 billion.

We have previously reported on the challenges associated with agencies’ 

efforts to identify duplicative IT investments. For example, in September 

2011 we reported that there were hundreds of investments providing 

similar functions across the federal government, including 1,536 

information and technology management investments, 781 supply chain 

management investments, and 661 human resource management 

investments.8 Further, we found that OMB guidance to agencies on how 

to report their IT investments did not ensure complete reporting or 

facilitate the identification of duplicative investments. Specifically, 

agencies differed on what investments they included as an IT investment, 

and OMB’s guidance requires each investment to be mapped to a single 

functional category. As a result, agencies’ annual IT investments were 

likely greater that the $79 billion reported in fiscal year 2011 and OMB’s 

ability to identify duplicative investments was limited. Further, we found 

that several agencies did not routinely assess operational systems to 

determine if they were duplicative. We recommended, among other 

things, that OMB clarify its guidance to help agencies better identify and 

categorize their IT investments and require agencies to report the steps 

they take to ensure that their IT investments are not duplicative. OMB 

agreed with these recommendations.

More recently, we reported on efforts at the Departments of Defense, 

Energy, and Homeland Security to identify duplicative IT investments.9

More specifically, we noted that although Defense, Energy, and 

Homeland Security use various investment review processes to identify 

duplicative investments, 37 of our sample of 810 investments were 

potentially duplicative at Defense and Energy. These investments 

accounted for about $1.2 billion in spending for fiscal years 2007 through 

2012. We also noted that investments were, in certain cases, 

misclassified by function, further complicating agencies’ ability to identify 

and eliminate duplicative investments. We recommended that Defense 

 

8

GAO, Information Technology: OMB Needs to Improve Its Guidance on IT Investments, 

GAO-11-826 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2011).

9

GAO, Information Technology: Departments of Defense and Energy Need to Address 

Potentially Duplicative Investments, GAO-12-241 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 17, 2012).

GAO Has Previously 

Reported on Opportunities 

to Reduce Duplication and 

Achieve Cost Savings in 

Critical IT-Related Areas
 

Page 5 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

and Energy utilize transparency mechanisms, such as the IT Dashboard10

to report on the results of their efforts to identify and eliminate potentially 

duplicative investments. The agencies generally agreed with this 

recommendation.

We have also reported on the value of portfolio management in helping to 

identify duplication and overlap and opportunities to leverage shared 

services. For example, we have reported extensively on various agencies’ 

IT investment management capabilities by using GAO’s IT Investment 

Management Framework,11 in which stage 3 identifies best practices for 

portfolio management, including (1) creating a portfolio which involves, 

among other things, grouping investments and proposals into predefined 

logical categories so they can be compared to one another within and 

across the portfolio categories, and the best overall portfolio can then be 

selected for funding, and (2) evaluating the portfolio by monitoring and 

controlling it to ensure it provides the maximum benefits at a desired cost 

and an acceptable level of risk.

Recognizing the proliferation of duplicative and low-priority IT investments 

within the federal government and the need to drive efficiency, OMB 

launched the PortfolioStat initiative in March 2012, which requires 26 

agencies to conduct an annual agency-wide IT portfolio review to, among 

other things, reduce commodity IT spending and demonstrate how their 

IT investments align with the agency’s mission and business functions.12

Toward this end, OMB defined 13 types of commodity IT investments in 

three broad categories: 

(1) Enterprise IT systems, which include e-mail; identity and access 

management; IT security; web hosting, infrastructure, and content; and 

collaboration tools. 

 

10In June 2009, OMB deployed a public website known as the IT Dashboard, which 

provides detailed information on federal agencies’ major IT investments, including 

assessments of actual performance against cost and schedule targets (referred to as 

ratings). 

11GAO, Information Technology Investment Management: A Framework for Assessing 

and Improving Process Maturity (Version 1.1), GAO-04-394G (Washington, D.C.: March 

2004). 

12OMB, Implementing PortfolioStat, Memorandum M-12-10 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 30, 

2012).

OMB Established 

PortfolioStat to Help 

Agencies Reduce 

Duplication and Achieve 

Cost Savings
 

Page 6 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

(2) IT infrastructure, which includes desktop systems, mainframes and 

servers, mobile devices, and telecommunications. 

(3) Business systems, which include financial management, grantsrelated federal financial assistance, grants-related transfer to state and 

local governments, and human resources management systems.13

PortfolioStat is designed to assist agencies in assessing the current 

maturity of their IT investment management process, making decisions on 

eliminating duplicative investments, and moving to shared solutions (such 

as cloud computing14) in order to maximize the return on IT investments 

across the portfolio. It is also intended to assist agencies in meeting the 

targets and requirements under other OMB initiatives aimed at eliminating 

waste and duplication and promoting shared services, such as the 

Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative, the Cloud Computing 

Initiative, and the IT Shared Services Strategy.

PortfolioStat is structured around five phases: (1) baseline data gathering

in which agencies are required to complete a high-level survey of their IT 

portfolio status and establish a commodity IT baseline; (2) analysis and 

proposed action plan in which agencies are to use the data gathered in 

phase 1 and other available agency data to develop a proposed action 

plan for consolidating commodity IT; (3) PortfolioStat session in which 

agencies are required to hold a face-to-face, evidence-based review of 

their IT portfolio with the Federal Chief Information Officer (CIO) and key 

stakeholders from the agency to discuss the agency’s portfolio data and 

proposed action plan, and agree on concrete next steps to rationalize the 

agency’s IT portfolio that would result in a final plan; (4) final action plan 

implementation, in which agencies are to, among other things, migrate at 

least two commodity IT investments; and (5) lessons learned, in which 

agencies are required to document lessons learned, successes, and 

 

13OMB made available “Frequently Asked Questions” which included definitions of these 

types of commodity IT investment based on OMB Circular A-11 and the Federal 

Enterprise Architecture Consolidated Reference Model (OMB, Circular No. A-11, 

Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget (Washington, D.C.: August 2012); 

OMB, FEA Consolidated Reference Model Document Version 2.3 (Washington, D.C.: 

October 2007)).

14Cloud computing is an emerging form of delivering computing services via networks with 

the potential to provide IT services more quickly and at a lower cost. Cloud computing 

provides users with on-demand access to a shared and scalable pool of computing 

resources with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. 
 

Page 7 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

challenges. Each of these phases is associated with more specific 

requirements and deadlines.

OMB has reported that the PortfolioStat effort has the potential to save 

the government $2.5 billion through fiscal year 2015 by consolidating and 

eliminating duplicative systems.

In its memo on implementing PortfolioStat, OMB established several key 

requirements for agencies: (1) designating a lead official with 

responsibility for implementing the process; (2) completing a high-level 

survey of their IT portfolio; (3) developing a baseline of the number, types, 

and costs of their commodity IT investments; (4) holding a face-to-face 

PortfolioStat session with key stakeholders to agree on actions to address 

duplication and inefficiencies in their commodity IT investments; (5) 

developing final action plans to document these actions; (6) migrating two 

commodity IT areas to shared services; and (7) documenting lessons 

learned.15 In addition, in guidance supporting the memo, agencies were 

asked to report estimated savings and cost avoidance associated with 

their consolidation and shared service initiatives through fiscal year 2015.

All 26 agencies that were required to implement the PortfolioStat process 

took actions to address OMB’s requirements. However, there were 

shortcomings in their implementation of selected requirements, such as 

addressing all required elements of the final action plan and migrating two 

commodity areas to a shared service by the end of 2012. Table 1 

summarizes the agencies’ implementation of the requirements in the 

memo, which are discussed in more detail below.

 

15OMB M-12-10.

Agencies Addressed 

PortfolioStat 

Requirements, but 

Baselines and 

Consolidation Plans 

Were Not All 

Complete 
 

Page 8 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Table 1: Agencies’ Implementation of PortfolioStat Requirements

Agency

Designate 

PortfolioStat 

lead

Complete 

IT 

portfolio 

survey

Develop 

commodity 

IT baseline

Hold 

PortfolioStat 

session a

Complete 

action plan 

with required 

elements

Complete 

two 

migration 

efforts 

Submit 

lessons

learned 

Requirements 

met

Agriculture Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes 5 of 7

Commerce Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes 6 of 7

Defense Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes 5 of 7 b

DHS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 6 of 7

Education Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 of 7

Energy Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 6 of 7

EPA Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes 4 of 7

GSA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes 6 of 7

HHS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 6 of 7

HUD Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes 4 of 7 b

Interior Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes 4 of 7

Justice Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 6 of 7

Labor Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes 4 of 7

NARA Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 6 of 7

NASA Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes 5 of 7

NRC Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes 5 of 7

NSF Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 6 of 7

OPM Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes 4 of 7

SBA Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes 5 of 7

SSA Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes 5 of 7

State Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes 5 of 7 b

Transportation Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes 5 of 7

Treasury Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 6 of 7

USACE Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes 5 of 7

USAID Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes 4 of 7

VA Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes 5 of 7

No. of agencies 

that met 

requirement 26 of 26 26 of 26 14 of 26 26 of 26 4 of 26 13 of 26 26 of 26

Source: GAO analysis of agency documentation.

Note: DHS—Department of Homeland Security; EPA—Environmental Protection Agency; GSA—

General Services Administration; HHS—Department of Health and Human Services; HUD—

Department of Housing and Urban Development; NARA—National Archives and Records 

Administration; NASA—National Aeronautics and Space Administration; NRC—U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission; NSF—National Science Foundation; OPM—Office of Personnel 

Management; SBA—Small Business Administration; SSA—Social Security Administration; USACE—
 

Page 9 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; USAID—U.S. Agency for International Development; VA—

Department of Veterans Affairs.

a

Agencies were given a rating of “no” if they could not ensure the completeness of their baseline 

information.

b

Agencies reported that they had submitted lessons learned information in their final action plan.

In the memo for implementing the PortfolioStat initiative, OMB required

each agency’s chief operating officer (COO) to designate and 

communicate within 10 days of the issuance of the memo an individual 

with direct reporting authority to the COO to lead the agency’s 

PortfolioStat implementation efforts. Consistent with a recent OMB memo 

requiring chief information officers (CIO) to take responsibility for 

commodity IT,16 19 of the 26 agencies designated the CIO or chief 

technology officer to lead their PortfolioStat efforts. The remaining 7 

agencies designated the Assistant Attorney General for Administration 

(Department of Justice), the deputy CIO (Department of Transportation), 

the Assistant Secretary for Management (Department of the Treasury), 

the Office of Information and Technology Chief Financial Officer 

(Department of Veterans Affairs), the Director, Office of Information 

Resources Management, Chief Human Capital Officer (National Science 

Foundation), the Senior Advisor to the Deputy Commissioner/Chief 

Operating Officer (Social Security Administration), and the Senior Deputy 

Assistant Administrator (U.S. Agency for International Development).

As part of the baseline data-gathering phase, OMB required agencies to 

complete a high-level survey of the status of their IT portfolio. The survey 

asked agencies to provide information related to implementing OMB 

guidance, including information on the CIO’s explicit authority to review 

and approve the entire IT portfolio,17 the percentage of IT investments 

that are reflected in the agency’s EA (required in OMB Circular A-130),18

and the percentage of agency IT investments (major and non-major) that 

 

16OMB, Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Chief 

Information Officer Authorities, M-11-29 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 8, 2011).

17OMB M-11-29 states that CIOs must drive the investment review process for IT 

investments and have responsibility over the entire IT portfolio for an agency. 

18OMB, Management of Federal Information Resources, Circular A-130 (Washington, 

D.C.: Nov. 28, 2000). 

Agencies Generally 

Designated the CIO as the 

Lead for PortfolioStat 

Efforts 

Portfolio Survey Provided 

Status of CIO Authority 

and Other Issues
 

Page 10 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

have gone through the TechStat process, both agency-led and OMB-led 

(required in OMB M-11-29).19

While all 26 agencies completed the survey, the survey responses 

highlighted that agencies varied in the maturity of their IT portfolio 

management practices. In particular, 6 agencies reported varying levels 

of CIO authority, 5 agencies reported that less than 100 percent of 

investments were reflected in the agency’s EA, and most agencies noted 

that less than 50 percent of their major and non-major investments had 

gone through the TechStat process.

Following are highlights of their responses:

CIO authority: Twenty of the 26 agencies stated that they either had a 

formal memorandum or policy in place explicitly noting the CIO’s authority 

to review and approve the entire agency IT portfolio or that the CIO 

collaborated with others (such as members of an investment review 

board) to exercise this authority. However, the remaining 6 agencies 

either reported that the CIO did not have this authority or there were 

limitations to the CIO’s authority:

• The Department of Energy reported that while its CIO worked with IT 

governance groups, by law, the department CIO has no direct 

authority over IT investments in two semi-autonomous agencies (the 

National Nuclear Security Administration and the Energy Information 

Administration20).

• Although the Department of Health and Human Services reported 

having a formal memo in place outlining the CIO’s authority and ability 

to review the entire IT portfolio, it also noted that the CIO had limited 

influence and ability to recommend changes to it.

 

19In January 2010, OMB began conducting TechStats, which are face-to-face, evidencebased reviews of an at-risk IT investment. Subsequently, as part of the Federal CIO’s 25-

point IT Reform Plan, OMB empowered agency CIOs to hold their own TechStat sessions 

within their respective agencies and required agencies to hold at least one TechStat 

session by March 2011, and one bureau-led TechStat review by June 2012. In August 

2011, OMB M-11-29 required agency CIOs to continue holding TechStat sessions.

20The Department of Energy referred to a statutory basis to support its statement about 

two semi-autonomous agencies. See generally National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-65, title XXXII, 113 Stat. 512, 953 (1999); Department 

of Energy Organization Act, Pub. L. No. 95-91, 91 Stat. 565 (1977). 
 

Page 11 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• The Department of State reported that its CIO currently has authority 

over just 40 percent of IT investments within the department.

• The National Aeronautics and Space Administration reported that its 

CIO does not have authority to review and approve the entire agency 

IT portfolio.

• The Office of Personnel Management reported that the CIO advises 

the Director, who approves the IT portfolio, but this role is not explicitly 

defined.

• The U.S. Agency for International Development reported that the 

CIO’s authority is limited to the portfolio that is executed within the 

office of the CIO.

It is important to note that OMB’s survey did not specifically require 

agencies to disclose limitations their CIOs might have in their ability to 

exercise the authorities and responsibilities provided by law and OMB 

guidance. Thus it is not clear whether all those who have such limitations 

reported them or whether those who reported limitations disclosed all of 

them.

We recently reported that while federal law provides CIOs with adequate 

authority to manage IT for their agencies, limitations exist that impede 

their ability to exercise this authority.21 We noted that OMB’s memo on 

CIO authorities22 was a positive step in reaffirming the importance of the 

role of CIOs in improving agency IT management, but did not require 

them to measure and report the progress of CIOs in carrying out these 

responsibilities. Consequently, we recommended that the Director of 

OMB establish deadlines and metrics that require agencies to 

demonstrate the extent to which their CIOs are exercising the authorities 

and responsibilities provided by law and OMB’s guidance. In response, 

OMB stated that it would ask agencies to report on the implementation of 

the memo.

 

21GAO, Federal Chief Information Officers: Opportunities Exist to Improve Role in 

Information Technology Management, GAO-11-634 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 15, 2011). 

22OMB, Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Chief 

Information Officer Authorities, M-11-29 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 8, 2011).
 

Page 12 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

The high-level survey responses regarding CIO authority at agencies 

indicate that several CIOs still do not exercise the authority needed to 

review and approve the entire IT portfolio, consistent with OMB guidance. 

Although OMB has issued guidance and required agencies to report on 

actions taken to implement it, this has not been sufficient to ensure that 

agency COOs address the issue of CIO authority at their respective 

agencies. As a result, agencies are hindered in addressing certain 

responsibilities set out in the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996,23 which 

established the position of CIO to advise and assist agency heads in 

managing IT investments. Until the Director of OMB and the Federal CIO 

require agencies to fully disclose limitations their CIOs may have in 

exercising the authorities and responsibilities provided by law and OMB’s 

guidance, OMB may lack crucial information needed to understand and 

address the factors that could prevent agencies’ from successfully 

implementing the PortfolioStat initiative.

Investments reflected in agencies’ enterprise architecture: Twenty 

one of the 26 agencies reported that 100 percent of their IT investments 

are reflected in their agency’s EA, while the remaining 5 agencies 

reported less than 100 percent: Commerce (90 percent), Justice (97 

percent), State (40 percent), National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (17 percent), and U.S. Agency for International 

Development (75 percent). According to OMB guidance, agencies must 

support an architecture with a complete inventory of agency information 

resources, including stakeholders and customers, equipment, systems, 

services, and funds devoted to information resources management and 

IT, at an appropriate level of detail.24 Until these agencies’ enterprise 

architectures reflect 100 percent of their IT investments, they will be 

limited in their ability to use this tool as a mechanism to identify low-value, 

duplicative, or wasteful investments.

TechStat process: Twenty-one of the 26 agencies reported that less 

than 50 percent of major and non-major investments had gone through 

the TechStat process and 1 reported that more than 50 percent of its 

 

23See Pub. L. No. 104-106, Div. E, 110 Stat. 186, 679 (1996); P.L. No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 

3009, 3009-393 (1996); 40 U.S.C 11101, et seq. 

24OMB, Guidance on Exhibits 53 and 300 – Information Technology and E-Government

(Washington, D.C.: July 1, 2013). 
 

Page 13 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

investments had gone through the process.25 As we have previously 

reported, TechStat accountability sessions have the value of focusing 

management attention on troubled projects and establishing clear action 

items to turn the projects around or terminate them.26 In addition, the 

TechStat model is consistent with government and industry best practices 

for overseeing IT investments, including our own guidance on IT 

investment management processes.27 Consistent with these survey 

responses, in June 2013 we reported that the number of TechStat 

sessions held to date was relatively small compared to the current 

number of medium- and high-risk IT investments at federal agencies. 

Accordingly, we recommended that OMB require agencies to conduct 

TechStat sessions on certain IT investments, depending on their risk 

level. Holding TechStat sessions will help strengthen overall IT 

governance and oversight and will help agencies to better manage their 

IT portfolio and reduce waste. OMB generally concurred with our 

recommendation and stated that it was taking steps to address it.

As part of the baseline data-gathering phase, each of the 26 agencies 

was also required to develop a comprehensive commodity IT baseline 

including information on each of the 13 types of commodity IT. Among 

other things, they were to include the fiscal year 2011 obligations incurred 

for commodity IT services and the number of systems providing these 

services. 

The 26 agencies reported that they obligated approximately $13.5 billion 

in fiscal year 2011 for commodity IT, with the majority of these obligations 

(about $8.1 billion) for investments related to IT Infrastructure. Agencies 

also classified approximately 71.2 percent of the commodity IT systems 

identified (about 1,937 of the 2,721 reported) as enterprise IT systems.28

Further, as illustrated in figure 1, of the total systems reported, most were 

 

25The remaining four agencies only addressed major investments in their response.

26GAO, Information Technology: Additional Executive Review Sessions Needed to 

Address Troubled Projects, GAO-13-524 (Washington, D.C.: June 13, 2013).

27 GAO-04-394G. 

28OMB did not request information on the number of systems associated with IT 

infrastructure. 

Commodity IT Baselines 

Were Not All Complete
 

Page 14 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

related to IT security, whereas the fewest systems were related to grantsrelated transfer to state and local governments.

Figure 1: Number of Business and Enterprise Commodity IT Systems Reported by 

Agencies

Note: The number of Defense business and enterprise commodity IT systems were not included 

because the department did not provide this information to OMB as part of the 2012 PortfolioStat.

When collecting data, it is important to have assurance that the data are 

accurate. We have previously reported on the need for agencies, when 

providing information to OMB, to explain the procedures used to verify 

their data.29 Specifically, agencies should ensure that reported data are 

sufficiently complete, accurate, and consistent, and also identify any 

significant data limitations. Explaining the limitations of information can 

provide a context for understanding and assessing the challenges 

agencies face in gathering, processing, and analyzing needed data. We 

have also reiterated the importance of providing OMB with complete and 

 

29GAO, Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Need to Complete Inventories and Plans to 

Achieve Expected Savings, GAO-11-565 (Washington, D.C.: July 19, 2011); and GAO, 

Agencies’ Annual Performance Plans under the Results Act: An Assessment Guide to 

Facilitate Congressional Decisionmaking, GAO/GGD/AIMD-10.1.18 (Washington, D.C.: 

February 1998).
 

Page 15 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

accurate data and the possible negative impact of that data being missing 

or incomplete.30

While all 26 agencies developed commodity IT baselines, these baselines 

were not all complete. Specifically, 12 agencies (the Departments of 

Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Housing and Urban Development, 

Labor, and the Interior; the Environmental Protection Agency, Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Office of Personnel Management, Small 

Business Administration, Social Security Administration, and U.S. Agency 

for International Development) could not ensure the completeness of their 

commodity IT baseline, either because they did not identify a process for 

this or faced challenges in collecting complete information. These 

agencies reported they were unable to ensure the completeness of their 

information for a range of reasons, including that they do not typically 

capture the required data at the level of detail required by OMB, that they 

used service contracts which do not allow visibility into specifics on the 

commodity IT inventory, that they lacked visibility into bureaus’ 

commodity IT information, and that OMB’s time frames did not allow for 

verification of information collected from lower-level units of the 

organization. Until agencies develop a complete commodity IT baseline, 

they may not have sufficient information to identify further consolidation 

opportunities.

While it is important that reported data are sufficiently complete, accurate,

and consistent, OMB did not require agencies to verify their data or 

disclose any limitations on the data provided and does not plan to collect 

this information as agencies provide updated information in quarterly 

reporting. Until OMB requires agencies to verify their data and disclose 

any limitations in integrated data collection quarterly reporting, it may lack 

information it needs to more effectively oversee agencies’ investment in 

commodity IT and identify Portfolio cost savings.

All 26 agencies held a PortfolioStat session in 2012, consistent with 

OMB’s requirement. In addition, the agencies noted that the agency CIO, 

Chief Administrative Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and COO—the key 

stakeholders identified in OMB memorandum 12-10—in many instances 

 

30GAO, Information Technology: OMB Has Made Improvements to Its Dashboard, but 

Further Work Is Needed by Agencies and OMB to Ensure Data Accuracy, GAO-11-262

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2011).

Key Stakeholders 

Generally Attended 

PortfolioStat Sessions
 

Page 16 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

attended this session.31 In the instances where key stakeholders did not 

attend, authorized representatives of those stakeholders generally 

attended in their place, according to agency officials. Involvement from 

key stakeholders in agencies’ PortfolioStat sessions is critical to ensuring 

agencies are maximizing their efforts to successfully implement 

PortfolioStat.

Agencies were required by OMB to complete a final action plan that 

addressed eight specific elements: (1) describe plans to consolidate 

authority over commodity IT spending under the agency CIO;32 (2) 

establish specific targets and deadlines for commodity IT spending 

reductions; (3) outline plans to migrate at least two commodity IT areas to 

shared services by December 31, 2012; (4) target duplicative systems or 

contracts that support common business functions for consolidation; (5) 

illustrate how investments within the IT portfolio align with the agency’s 

mission and business functions; (6) establish criteria for identifying 

wasteful, “low-value,” or duplicative investments; (7) establish a process 

to identify these potential investments and a schedule for eliminating 

them from the portfolio; and (8) improve governance and program 

management using best practices and, where possible, benchmarks.

All 26 agencies completed an action plan as required by OMB, but the 

extent to which they addressed the required items varied. Specifically, 18 

agencies fully addressed at least six of the eight required elements—with 

Commerce, Education, General Services Administration, and Social 

Security Administration addressing all of them—and the remaining 8 

agencies fully addressed five requirements or fewer and either partially 

addressed or did not address others. The consolidation of commodity IT 

spending under the agency CIO and establishment of criteria for 

identifying low-value, wasteful, and duplicative investments were the 

 

31The Department of Education was unable to confirm the individuals who attended its 

PortfolioStat session, and the Department of Health and Human Services was only able to 

confirm that its CIO was in attendance. In addition, the National Science Foundation and 

the Office of Personnel Management stated that they did not have a chief administrative 

officer at the time of the 2012 PortfolioStat session. 

32We recognize that there may be instances where legal or other constraints upon the 

agency may limit the CIO’s consolidation of authority over commodity IT spending. In this 

report, however, we assess agencies’ completion of a final action plan, required by OMB, 

an element of which is a description of plans to consolidate authority over commodity IT 

spending under the agency CIO. 

Agencies’ Action Plans Did 

Not Always Address All 

Required Elements
 

Page 17 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

elements that were addressed the least (12 and 9 agencies respectively); 

and the alignment of investments to the agency’s mission and 

improvement of governance and program management were addressed 

by all agencies. Table 2 shows the extent to which the 26 agencies 

addressed the required elements in their action plan.

Until agencies address the items that were required in the PortfolioStat 

action plan in future OMB reporting, they will not be in a position to fully 

realize the intended benefits of the PortfolioStat initiative.

Table 2: Extent to Which Agency Action Plans Addressed Required Elements

Agency

Consolidate 

commodity IT 

spending 

under the CIO

Establish 

targets and 

deadlines 

for 

commodity 

IT spending 

reductions

Migrate at 

least two 

commodity 

IT areas to 

shared 

services 

Target 

duplicative 

systems or 

contracts for 

consolidation

Mission 

and 

business 

function 

alignment

Criteria for 

wasteful, 

low-value, 

or 

duplicative 

investments

Process to 

identify and 

schedule to 

eliminate 

wasteful, 

low-value, 

or 

duplicative 

investments

Improve 

governance 

and program 

management 

Agriculture No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Commerce Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Defense No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

DHS No Yes a Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Education Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Energy No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

EPA No Partially Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

GSA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

HHS Partially Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

HUD Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Interior Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Justice Yes Partially Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Labor Partially Partially Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

NARA No Yes Yes Partially Yes No No Yes

NASA No Yes Yes Partially Yes No No Yes

NRC Partially No Yes Partially Yes Yes Partially Yes

NSF No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

OPM Yes Yes Partially Partially Yes Yes Yes Yes

SBA Partially No Yes Partially Yes Yes Partially Yes

SSA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

State No Partially No Partially Yes Yes Partially Yes
 

Page 18 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Agency

Consolidate 

commodity IT 

spending 

under the CIO

Establish 

targets and 

deadlines 

for 

commodity 

IT spending 

reductions

Migrate at 

least two 

commodity 

IT areas to 

shared 

services 

Target 

duplicative 

systems or 

contracts for 

consolidation

Mission 

and 

business 

function 

alignment

Criteria for 

wasteful, 

low-value, 

or 

duplicative 

investments

Process to 

identify and 

schedule to 

eliminate 

wasteful, 

low-value, 

or 

duplicative 

investments

Improve 

governance 

and program 

management 

Transportation No Partially Yes Partially Yes Yes Partially Yes

Treasury No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

USACE No Yes Yes Partially Yes No Partially Yes

USAID Yes Yes Yes Partially Yes Yes Partially Yes

VA Yes Yes Yes Partially Yes Yes Yes Yes

Source: GAO analysis of agency documentation.

Notes: A “partially” rating was given if the plan addressed a portion but not all of the information 

required in the element. DHS—Department of Homeland Security; EPA—Environmental Protection 

Agency; GSA—General Services Administration; HHS—Department of Health and Human Services; 

HUD—Department of Housing and Urban Development; NARA—National Archives and Records 

Administration; NASA—National Aeronautics and Space Administration; NRC— U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission; NSF—National Science Foundation; OPM—Office of Personnel 

Management; SBA—Small Business Administration; SSA—Social Security Administration; USACE—

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; USAID—U.S. Agency for International Development; VA—

Department of Veterans Affairs.

a

While Homeland Security’s final PortfolioStat action plan did not include this required element, the 

department provided information to OMB in May 2013 that addressed their effort to consolidate 

commodity IT spending under the CIO. Therefore, we did not make a recommendation to Homeland 

Security to require them to report on this element in future OMB reporting.

Memorandum 12-10 required the 26 agencies to complete the migration 

of the two commodity IT areas mentioned in their action plan to shared 

services by December 31, 2012 (see app. II for the list of migration efforts 

by agency). However, 13 of the 26 agencies (the Departments of Housing 

and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation and 

Veterans Affairs; the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services 

Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of 

Personnel Management, Social Security Administration, U.S. Agency for 

International Development, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) 

reported that they still had not completed the migration of these areas as 

of August 2013. These agencies reported several reasons for this, 

including delays in establishing contracts with vendors due to the current 

budget situation, and delays due to technical challenges. 

While OMB has stated that this initial requirement to migrate two systems 

was to initiate consolidation activities at the agencies, and not necessarily 

an action which it was intending to track for compliance, tracking the 

Agencies Did Not All 

Complete Required 

Migration Efforts
 

Page 19 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

progress of such efforts would help to ensure accountability for agencies’ 

results and the continued progress of PortfolioStat. OMB’s 2013 

PortfolioStat memo includes a requirement for agencies to report 

quarterly on the status of consolidation efforts and the actual and planned 

cost savings and/or avoidances achieved or expected, but the guidance 

does not specify that agencies should report on the status of the two 

migration efforts initiated in 2012. Until agencies report on the progress in 

consolidating the two commodity IT areas to shared services and OMB 

requires them to report on the status of these two efforts in the integrated 

data collection quarterly reporting, agencies will be held less accountable 

for the results of all their PortfolioStat efforts.

Memorandum 12-10 required agencies to document and catalogue 

successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the PortfolioStat 

process into a document which was to be submitted to OMB by February 

1, 2013.33 Of the 26 agencies required to implement the PortfolioStat 

process, 23 agencies submitted lessons learned documentation. The 3 

agencies that did not submit lessons learned in the format requested by 

OMB indicated that they did not submit this documentation because 

lessons learned had already been included in their final action plans.

Several agencies identified lessons learned related to the CIO’s authority 

and the use of an IT valuation model (12 and 15, respectively).34 More 

specifically, 8 agencies noted that OMB’s requirements for a plan to 

consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO and to identify 

the extent to which the CIO possesses explicit agency authority to review 

and approve the entire agency IT portfolio had enabled their agencies to 

improve the management of their commodity IT and portfolio. Further, 4 

agencies stated that the requirements regarding CIO authority would help 

 

33OMB provided agencies a template for documenting successes, challenges, and 

lessons learned in key areas, including CIO authority, valuation model, and program 

management, although several agencies used their own format. 

34An IT valuation model or methodology is used to comparatively evaluate investments 

based on their value to the agency and the cost to the taxpayer using a set of agencydefined criteria. The federal CIO Council Best Practices committee issued a how-to-guide 

in October 2002 whose purpose is to define, capture, and measure value associated with 

electronic services unaccounted for in traditional return-on-investment calculations, to fully 

account for costs, and to identify and consider risk. See CIO Council Best Practices 

Committee, Value Measuring Methodology: How-To-Guide (Washington, D.C.: October

2002).

Lessons Learned Highlight 

Importance of CIO 

Authority and Value 

Engineering 
 

Page 20 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

them identify opportunities to achieve efficiencies and reduce duplication 

or migrate areas to a shared service. In addition, 1 agency encouraged 

OMB to continue to provide guidance and issue directives related to CIO 

authority and empowerment. With respect to the agencies’ use of an IT 

valuation model, 8 agencies generally recognized the value of using such 

a model; however, they identified challenges in determining the 

appropriate model and the need to continue to refine processes and 

analyze the supporting cost data. Two agencies also stated that OMB 

should assist in facilitating and sharing IT valuation model best practices 

and other benchmarks among federal agencies. More specifically, 1 

agency stated that OMB should assist in the development of a federal IT 

valuation model, and another agency suggested that best practices 

regarding IT valuation models should include those from private sector 

institutions.

As part of the 2013 OMB memorandum on PortfolioStat, OMB generally 

identified the same broad themes from the lessons learned documents 

that agencies reported. OMB has also established a page related to the 

2013 PortfolioStat implementation.

In separate guidance supporting the PortfolioStat initiative, OMB asked 

agencies to report planned cost savings and avoidance35 associated with 

their consolidation and shared service initiatives through fiscal year 2015. 

While agencies included consolidation efforts for which they had cost 

savings numbers, six agencies also reported planned migration or 

consolidation efforts for which they had incomplete information on cost 

savings and avoidance.

According to OMB, agencies reported a total of 98 consolidation 

opportunities and $2.53 billion in planned cost savings and avoidance for 

fiscal years 2013 through 2015. However, OMB’s overall estimate of the 

number of opportunities and cost savings is underreported. Among other 

things, it does not include the Departments of Defense and Justice 

because these agencies did not report their plans in the template OMB 

was using to compile its overall estimate. While OMB acknowledged that 

the $2.53 billion in planned cost savings and avoidance was 

 

35According to OMB Exhibit 300 guidance, cost savings represents the reduction in actual 

expenditures while cost avoidance represents results taken from an action in the 

immediate time frame that will decrease costs in the future. 

Opportunities and 

Estimated Cost Savings 

Are Underreported
 

Page 21 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

underreported when it issued the estimate, it did not qualify the figure 

quoted. Identifying any limitations or qualifications to reported figures is 

important in order to provide a more complete understanding of the 

information presented. Until OMB discloses any limitations or 

qualifications to the data it reports on the agency’s consolidation efforts 

and associated savings and avoidance, the public and other stakeholders 

may lack crucial information needed to understand the current status of 

PortfolioStat and agency progress in meeting the goals of the initiative.

Our analysis of data collected from the 26 agencies shows that they are 

reporting 204 opportunities and at least $5.8 billion in savings through 

fiscal year 2015, at least $3.3 billion more than the number initially 

reported by OMB. See table 3 for an overview of the number of 

opportunities and reported cost savings and avoidance by agency. See 

appendix III for a detailed list of opportunities and associated savings by 

agency.36

 

36Subsequent to its report of agencies’ planned consolidation initiatives and associated 

savings, OMB issued the 2013 PortfolioStat memo requiring agencies to submit an 

updated list of consolidation initiatives and estimated cost savings and avoidance by May 

15, 2013. Some agencies reported to us that the information provided in this submission 

has changed from what they reported in 2012.
 

Page 22 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Table 3: Agency-Reported PortfolioStat Initiatives and Estimated Cost Savings and Avoidance

Agency

Number of 

initiatives

FY13 cost 

savings and 

avoidance

FY14 cost

savings and 

avoidance

FY15 cost

savings and 

avoidance 

Total cost savings and 

avoidance FY13–FY15

Dollars in millions

Agriculture 3 72.84 86.61 109.54 268.99 

Commerce 8 8.19 16.60 43.01 67.80 

Defense 26 a - - - 3200.00–5,300.00

DHS 15 369.27 501.25 501.25 1,371.77 

Education 18 2.02 1.63 1.63 5.28 

Energy 16 8.21 10.36 12.15 30.72 

EPA 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

GSA 3 2.12 3.29 7.79 13.20

HHS 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

HUD 4 2.87 2.87 2.86 8.60

Interior 6 20.12 22.95 18.82 61.89 

Justice 12 b - - - 35.00

Labor 12 1.75 8.59–9.89 11.96–13.26 22.30–24.90 

NARA 3 -0.02 -0.02 6.47 6.43 

NASA 6 19.02 23.29 24.97 67.29 

NRC 8 0.00 9.60 0.00 9.60 

NSF 2 0.27 0.24 0.24 0.75 

OPM 2 0.00 3.50 0.00 3.50 

SBA 6 0.43 0.37 0.00 0.79 

SSA 7 7.23 150.15 8.78 166.16 

State 4 0.00 20.00 6.00 26.00 

Transportation 24 14.40 36.57 0.00 50.98 

Treasury 2 24.03 67.75 101.00 192.78 

USACE 2 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.50 

USAID 4 3.44 5.24 8.76 17.44 

VA 7 54.18 52.51 89.22 195.92 

Total 204 c 610.87 1023.84–1025.14 954.96–956.26 5824.66–7927.26 

Source: GAO analysis of agency data.

Note: DHS—Department of Homeland Security; EPA—Environmental Protection Agency; GSA—

General Services Administration; HHS—Department of Health and Human Services; HUD—

Department of Housing and Urban Development; NARA—National Archives and Records 

Administration; NASA—National Aeronautics and Space Administration; NRC— U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission; NSF—National Science Foundation; OPM—Office of Personnel 

Management; SBA—Small Business Administration; SSA—Social Security Administration; USACE—

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; USAID—U.S. Agency for International Development; VA—

Department of Veterans Affairs.
 

Page 23 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Note: FY—fiscal year

a

Defense did not provide information on the number of opportunities or potential cost savings to OMB 

in the cost savings template. This information was obtained from the department’s final action plan 

and other referenced documentation. The department reported savings for fiscal year 2012-2015 but 

did not break down cost savings by initiative.

b

Justice did not provide information on the number of opportunities or potential cost savings to OMB 

in the cost savings template. This information was obtained from the department’s final action plan. 

According to officials, the $35 million total represents a rough-order-of-magnitude estimate.

C

Numbers may not add up due to rounding.

In their portfolio improvement plans, the five agencies selected for our 

review—the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, the Interior, the 

Treasury, and Veterans Affairs—identified a total of 52 initiatives 

expected to achieve at least $3.7 billion in potential cost savings or 

avoidance through fiscal year 2015, as well as several improvements of 

processes for managing their IT portfolios. To identify these opportunities, 

the agencies used several processes and tools, including, to varying 

degrees, their EA and valuation model, as recommended by OMB in its 

PortfolioStat guidance. More consistently using the processes 

recommended by OMB could assist agencies in identifying further 

opportunities for consolidation and shared services. In addition, four 

agencies did not always provide support for their estimated savings or 

show how it linked to the estimates. Better support for the estimated 

savings would increase the likelihood that these savings will be achieved.

The Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) identified two contract 

consolidations—the Cellular Phone Contract Consolidation and the 

Enterprise Contracts for Standardized Security Products and Services—

as the commodity IT investments it planned to consolidate by December 

2012. In addition to these two efforts, the department identified three 

efforts that it reported to OMB would yield cost savings or avoidance 

between fiscal years 2013 and 2015 (IT Infrastructure 

Consolidation/Enterprise Data Center Consolidation, Enterprise IT 

Systems: Tier 1 Helpdesk Consolidation, and Enterprise IT Systems: 

Geospatial Consolidation Initiative). In addition, Agriculture identified 

several other opportunities for which it had yet to identify associated cost 

savings or avoidance. According to officials from the Office of the CIO, 

several of the consolidation opportunities were identified prior to the 

PortfolioStat initiative being launched, as part of the Secretary’s initiative 

to streamline administrative processes. The department also identified 

several process improvement efforts which, while not all specific to 

commodity IT, would help better manage these types of investments. 

Selected 

Departments’ Plans 

Identified Billions in 

Potential Cost Savings 

Using Various 

Processes, but 

Support for These 

Savings Is Uneven

Department of Agriculture
 

Page 24 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Examples of the process improvement efforts include (1) recommitting to 

internal TechStats as a tool for evaluating all IT investments, (2) acquiring 

a portfolio management tool, and (3) implementing a department-wide 

portfolio management program that reviews major and non-major 

investments on a continual basis.

Agriculture officials stated that they used their EA process to identify 

consolidation and shared service opportunities, and that the department 

checks for architectural compliance throughout its governance process. 

For example, Agriculture’s Executive IT Investment Review Board is to 

ensure that the department integrates information systems investment 

decisions with its EA and that the department’s decisions comply with EA. 

In addition, Agriculture’s Information Priorities and Investment Council is 

responsible for reviews of architectural compliance and for using the EA 

as a framework for investment decision making. These officials also 

stated that while the department determines the value of its IT 

investments through evaluation, analyses, prioritization, and scoring, it 

does not have a formal, documented valuation model for doing so. Having 

such a model would enhance the department’s ability to identify additional 

opportunities to consolidate or eliminate low-value, duplicative, or 

wasteful investments.

The department also uses other processes to help manage its IT 

investments. For example, Agriculture has an Executive IT Investment 

Review Board which is to use a scoring process in ensuring the alignment 

of investments with strategic goals and objectives. Further, the 

department noted the establishment of several governance boards, and 

processes, such as the EA, IT acquisition approval request, and capital 

planning and investment control, to ensure such alignment.

Agriculture anticipates that its efforts will generate about $221 million in 

cost savings or avoidance for fiscal years 2012 through 2015 and 

provided varying degrees of support for these estimates. Specifically, for 

two of the four initiatives for which we requested support37 (Cellular 

Phone Contract Consolidation and the IT Infrastructure 

Consolidation/Enterprise Data Center Consolidation), it provided support 

for calculations for cost savings and avoidance estimates. However, 

 

37For each of the five agencies, we requested the supporting documentation for four 

efforts: the two efforts that were to be migrated by December 2012 and two efforts with the 

highest anticipated cost savings or avoidance for fiscal year 2013 to 2015.
 

Page 25 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

these estimates did not match those provided to OMB for the 2012 

PortfolioStat process. For the third initiative, Geospatial Consolidation, 

Agriculture did not provide support for the estimate reported to OMB as 

part of the 2012 PortfolioStat process; however, it noted that this current 

estimate is $58.76 million less than originally reported to OMB. For the 

fourth, a department official from the office of the Chief Information Officer 

said no savings were being anticipated. Documentation received from the 

department noted that this effort was not a cost savings initiative but a 

way to meet several programmatic needs: to streamline the work required 

for agencies procuring security services, to improve the quality and 

repeatability of the security products across the agencies, and to 

establish a process flow that ensured the department security were 

included in any delivered products. An Agriculture official noted 

challenges with calculating cost savings or avoidance but did not identify 

any plans to improve its cost estimating processes. A lack of support for 

its current estimates may make it difficult for Agriculture to realize these 

savings and for OMB and other stakeholders to accurately gauge its 

performance.

The Department of Defense (Defense) identified its Unclassified 

Information Sharing Service/All Partner Network and the General Fund 

Enterprise Business System as the two commodity opportunities that 

would be consolidated by December 2012. In addition to these 2 efforts, 

Defense identified 24 other efforts that would be undertaken from 2012 to 

2015 to consolidate commodity IT services. These consolidation efforts 

were mostly in the areas of Enterprise IT and IT infrastructure, though the 

department also identified a significant effort to move its major 

components to enterprise-wide business systems. In addition, Defense 

also identified several process improvements, including restructuring its 

IT governance boards, establishing a department IT Commodity Council, 

and optimizing IT services purchasing. Defense began its effort to 

consolidate and improve IT services in 2010 at the request of the 

Secretary, prior to the launch of PortfolioStat. The Defense CIO 

developed a 10-Point Plan for IT Modernization focused on consolidating 

infrastructure and streamlining processes in several commodity IT areas, 

including consolidating enterprise networks, delivering a department 

cloud environment, standardizing IT platforms, and taking an enterprise 

approach for procurement of common IT hardware and software. Each of 

the component CIOs, in coordination with the Defense CIO, was tasked 

with developing plans to achieve these efforts within their own 

component.

Department of Defense
 

Page 26 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

As part of this process, Defense utilized its EA and valuation model to 

determine the list of IT improvements because, according to officials from 

the Office of the CIO, these processes were incorporated into its existing 

requirements, acquisition, and planning, programming, budget, and 

execution processes. In particular, Defense has taken a federated 

approach for developing and managing its EA that is based on enterpriselevel guidance, capability areas, and component architectures and is 

currently in the process of drafting a new EA program management plan 

for improvement effectiveness and interoperability across missions and 

infrastructure. In addition, according to a Defense official, the department 

has done extensive work related to implementing a valuation model, and 

its value engineering process for IT investments has been integrated into 

the department’s acquisition process. Defense also has a department 

website devoted to providing guidance on its valuation model. Using the 

EA and valuation model increases the likelihood that the department will 

identify a comprehensive list of opportunities for consolidation.38

Defense’s CIO estimates that the consolidation efforts will save between 

$3.2 billion and $5.2 billion through fiscal year 2015, and result in 

efficiencies between $1.3 billion and $2.2 billion per year beginning in 

fiscal year 2016. Defense provided its most recent estimates for the four 

initiatives for which we requested support (Unclassified Information 

Sharing Service/All Partner Access Network, data center consolidation, 

enterprise software purchasing, and General Fund Enterprise Business 

System) but was unable to show how these estimates were calculated. 

For the first initiative, the issue paper showing the calculations of 

estimated savings was reportedly classified and we therefore decided not 

to obtain a copy.

39 For the other three initiatives, an official from the Office 

of the CIO stated that there was not support available at the department 

level. Each component reportedly used its existing planning, 

programming, budget and execution process, and associated systems to 

 

38Since 1995, we have designated the Department of Defense’s business systems 

modernization program as high risk because of its vulnerability to fraud, waste, abuse, and 

mismanagement, and because of missed opportunities to achieve greater efficiencies. 

Since then, we have made a series of recommendations aimed at strengthening its 

institutional approach to modernization and reducing the risk associated with key 

investments. See most recently GAO, DOD Business Systems Modernization: Further 

Actions Needed to Address Challenges and Improve Accountability, GAO-13-557

(Washington, D.C.: May 17, 2013).

39We were informed the document was classified at the end of our review. Due to the 

timing, we decided not to obtain a copy or select another initiative for review. 
 

Page 27 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

determine a overall budget and then identified estimated cost savings or 

avoidance related to the commodity initiatives, which were then 

aggregated by the department. The official also reported that, because 

the department’s accounting systems do not collect information at the 

level of granularity required for reporting on the PortfolioStat initiative 

(e.g., by commodity IT type), it is difficult to show how numbers were 

calculated or how they changed over time. In addition, because 

component-level systems do not collect commodity IT data, it had 

generally been a challenge for the department to determine cost savings 

for commodity IT as OMB required. While we recognize the challenges 

the department faces in obtaining the support for consolidation 

opportunities identified by its components, obtaining it is critical to 

ensuring that planned savings and cost avoidance are realized. This is 

important considering the size of Defense’s projected savings.

The Department of the Interior (Interior) identified two commodity IT 

investments in its action plan and other supporting documentation— 

Financial and Business Management System (Deployments 7&8) and 

Enterprise Forms System—that it planned to consolidate by December 

2012. For fiscal years 2013 to 2015, Interior identified four additional 

consolidation opportunities—cloud e-mail and collaboration services, 

enterprise eArchive system, circuit consolidation, and the Networx 

telecommunications contract. Interior also identified its “IT 

Transformation” initiative as a source of additional savings beyond 2015.

This initiative is one of the management priorities which, according to 

officials, Interior has been focusing on to drive efficiency, reduce costs, 

and improve services. It is intended to streamline processes within the 

department, to include a single e-mail system for the department, 

telecommunications, hosting services, and an enterprise service desk 

(help desk).

Interior has also identified efforts to improve processes for managing its 

portfolio. Specifically, it is working to fully implement its EA and to align 

the IT portfolio more closely with the department’s business priorities and 

performance goals. In addition, in fiscal year 2010, Interior centralized 

authority for the agency’s IT—which had previously been delegated to its 

offices and bureaus—under the CIO. This consolidation gave the CIO 

responsibilities for improving the operating efficiencies of the 

organizational sub-components and Interior as a whole. Interior is also 

establishing several new IT Investment governance boards to make 

recommendations to the CIO for review and approval.

Department of the Interior
 

Page 28 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

To identify its consolidation opportunities, Interior officials from the Office 

of the CIO stated they used their EA. Specifically, the department 

established an EA team and a performance-driven prioritization 

framework to measure its IT Transformation efforts. The EA team takes a 

“ruthless prioritization” approach to align the department’s priorities with 

the IT Transformation goals. The priorities are evaluated by IT 

Transformation goals and expected outcomes, and supported by 

successive versions of architectures, plans, and solutions. In addition to 

using the EA, officials from the Office of the CIO stated that the 

department leveraged a set of investment processes to identify wasteful, 

duplicative, and low-value investments, which includes the use of road 

maps it has developed for different functional areas. Collectively, these 

processes are integrated into the department’s capital planning and 

investment control process in order to ensure that the portfolio of IT 

investments delivers the desired value to the organization.

Interior officials from the Office of the CIO also reported using its IT 

investment valuation process which it has been maturing while also 

balancing changes to its IT governance process. More specifically, the 

department uses the Value Measuring Methodology, recommended by 

the federal CIO Council, to score its bureaus’ budget requests. Based on 

these assessments, a risk-adjusted value score is assigned to each major 

investment. These scores are used to identify funding levels across 

Interior’s IT portfolio, with risk being viewed from the standpoint of the 

“probability of success” for the investment. By making use of the EA and 

investment valuation process as recommended by OMB, Interior has 

enhanced its ability to identify opportunities to consolidate or eliminate 

duplicative, low-value, and wasteful investments.

Interior anticipates its PortfolioStat efforts will generate approximately 

$61.9 million in savings and cost avoidance through fiscal year 2015 and 

provided adequate support for these estimates. Specifically, for the 

Financial and Business Management System, Interior provided 

calculations for the savings for each year from fiscal year 2012 to fiscal 

year 2016. For the other three initiatives—Electronic Forms System, 

Networx Telecommunications, and Cloud E-mail and Collaboration 

Services—Interior provided estimated savings for fiscal year 2013, the 

first year in which savings are anticipated, which were based on the 

difference between the fiscal year 2012 baseline and lower costs that had 

been achieved through the department’s strategic sourcing initiative, and 

explained that these savings were expected to be realized each year 

after—through fiscal year 2015. Having well-supported estimates 

increases the likelihood that Interior will realize its planned savings and 
 

Page 29 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

provides OMB and other stakeholders with greater visibility into the 

department’s performance.

The Department of the Treasury (Treasury) identified two new shared 

service opportunities—the Invoice Processing Platform and the DoNotPay 

Business Center—as the two commodity IT investments it planned to 

consolidate by December 2012; Treasury also reported to OMB that 

these efforts would yield cost savings and avoidance for fiscal years 2013 

through 2015. In addition, Treasury identified six consolidation 

opportunities it anticipated would generate savings between fiscal years 

2012 and 2014, and two others which did not have associated cost 

savings. These consolidation opportunities include those classified as 

Business Systems, IT Infrastructure, and Enterprise IT. Treasury also 

described several process improvement efforts which, while not specific 

to commodity IT, will help better manage these types of investments. 

Examples of the process improvement efforts include establishing criteria 

for robust reviews of investments, refining the department’s valuation and 

risk models and incorporating these models into the business case 

template at Treasury’s departmental offices, and launching an IT cost 

model working group to refine Treasury’s IT cost model. Treasury has 

also proposed additional steps in its Departmental Offices’ IT governance 

process and investment life cycle to evaluate the alignment of 

investments with its strategic goals and objectives. With respect to EA, in 

July 2013, Treasury established a Treasury Departmental Technical 

Advisory Working Group. According to its charter, the working group will 

be responsible for, among other things, ensuring the alignment of 

programs and projects with Treasury’s existing technologies or EA. More 

specifically, all new and existing investments are expected to be reviewed 

and approved by the working group to ensure such compliance.

Treasury officials from the Office of the CIO stated they had not used the 

EA or a valuation model to identify their consolidation opportunities. In 

addition, Treasury has yet to develop a valuation model for assessing the 

value of its IT investments. According to officials, Treasury’s efforts to 

develop a valuation model are 30 to 40 percent complete. Further, while it 

has efforts underway within its Departmental Offices to develop models 

for assessing value, cost, and risk, Treasury has not documented its 

value engineering process and associated models. According to the 

officials, the department’s consolidation opportunities were identified 

through innovative ideas from the bureaus that were driven by current 

budget constraints. While the identification of these opportunities is not 

centrally managed or controlled, Treasury reported that it is currently 

Department of the 

Treasury
 

Page 30 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

developing a systematic process for promoting innovative ideas from its 

bureaus.

According to Treasury, it uses other processes to help manage IT 

investments, including a process for evaluating the alignment of 

investments with its strategic goals and objectives via its investment 

review boards at both the department-wide and departmental office 

levels. Further, Treasury has noted that investments’ alignment with the 

mission is considered during the annual planning cycle (for existing and 

new investments), and during individual investment/project reviews (for 

every major investment). While Treasury identified consolidation and 

shared service opportunities through innovative ideas from its bureaus, 

utilizing the EA and valuation model could assist Treasury in identifying 

additional opportunities for cost savings.

Treasury anticipates it will generate $56.49 million in savings from fiscal 

years 2012 through 2014 and provided varying degrees of support for 

these estimates.40 Specifically, for two of the three initiatives that we 

reviewed supporting documentation for,41 one initiative (DoNotPay

Business Center) had supporting assumptions and calculations; however, 

these calculations support earlier estimates Treasury reported for this 

initiative, and not its more recent estimates. Treasury did not provide 

documentation to support the cost estimates for the two remaining efforts 

(Fiscal IT Data Center Consolidation and Business Process Management 

Status). Without support for its estimates, Treasury may be challenged in 

realizing planned savings, and OMB and other stakeholders will be 

hindered in evaluating its progress.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) identified its VA Server 

Virtualization and Elimination of Dedicated Fax Servers as the two 

commodity IT investments it planned to consolidate by December 2012. 

In its PortfolioStat submission to OMB, VA identified five additional 

 

40These estimates are based on Treasury’s May 2013 integrated data collection to OMB 

and do not include cost savings or avoidance of $116. 25 million which Treasury 

anticipates will be achieved by other federal agencies using its Invoice Processing 

Platform.

41We did not review supporting documentation for the cost savings/avoidance estimates 

associated with the Invoice Processing Platform due to the fact that these cost 

savings/avoidance will be achieved by other agencies, not Treasury. 

Department of Veterans 

Affairs 
 

Page 31 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

consolidation opportunities it anticipated would generate savings between 

fiscal years 2013 and 2015 (enterprise license agreement, 

standardization of spend planning and consolidation of contract, voice 

over internet protocol, vista data feeds, and one CPU policy). VA also 

described several process improvement efforts in its action plan that, 

while not specific to commodity IT, are intended to help better manage 

these types of investments. These improvement efforts include updating 

its EA process and establishing a Project Management Accountability 

System that supports project planning and management control and 

responsibilities for IT investments.

VA officials from the Office of the CIO stated that they did not use their 

EA (which the department is still maturing) or their valuation model to 

identify their consolidation opportunities. Instead, they stated that VA 

uses its Ruthless Reduction Taskforce as the main mechanism for 

identifying IT commodity consolidation opportunities. The task force’s 

function is to ensure redundant functionality is reduced or eliminated and 

to recommend the reallocation of funds from low-value projects to higher 

priorities. Through its operational analysis process, it looks for excessive 

expenditures to determine whether there are redundancies and therefore 

opportunities to consolidate into a larger contract or service.42

While the task force is the main mechanism used to identify consolidation 

opportunities, VA officials from the Office of the CIO stated that the 

department uses other OMB-recommended processes to help it identify 

and prioritize other IT investments. For example, VA has documented 

processes for evaluating the alignment of investments with its strategic 

goals and objectives via its multiyear planning process and its senior 

investment review boards. Specifically, the department’s multiyear

planning process provides a framework for identifying near- and long-term 

priorities and opportunities for divestiture, reduction, re-investments, and 

 

42The Ruthless Reduction Task Force’s approach includes: (1) utilizing subject matter 

expert opinions to examine analytical and engineering processes; perform an analysis of 

alternatives through business case analysis, financial analysis, and cost analysis; and reexamine/modify approaches to achieving cost savings/avoidance; (2) reviewing the use of 

IT equipment, software, and systems to determine value, gauge efficiency, and formulate 

recommendations for potential cost savings or cost avoidance; and, (3) establishing a VAwide process to continuously solicit and collect ideas and recommendations to improve 

the efficiency of IT projects, programs, and the acquisition and allocation of equipment; 

and assisting project managers in the development of VA-wide cost savings measures for 

presentation to the Assistant Secretary.
 

Page 32 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

expansion of IT priorities and capabilities and timetables. To support this 

and other planning processes, VA has established several IT Investment 

governance boards that are intended to provide a framework for 

investment decision making and accountability to ensure IT initiatives 

meet the department’s strategic and business objectives in an effective 

manner. While VA has identified many opportunities to consolidate 

commodity IT investments and move to shared services through its 

Ruthless Reduction Task Force and other processes, making use of its 

EA and valuation model could help identify additional opportunities.

VA estimates that the consolidation opportunities it reported to OMB will 

generate about $196 million in savings from fiscal years 2013 through 

2015. However, we could not verify the support for some of the estimates. 

In particular, for two of the four initiatives for which we requested support 

(Server Virtualization and Eliminate Dedicated Fax Servers 

Consolidation), VA provided support for calculations for cost savings and 

avoidance estimates. However, these estimates did not match those 

provided to OMB for the 2012 PortfolioStat process. For the third 

initiative, Renegotiate Microsoft Enterprise License Agreement, VA did 

not provide detailed support but instead provided a written explanation for 

an overall cost avoidance figure of $161 million that was agreed to by 

VA’s Deputy Chief Information Officer for Architecture, Strategy and 

Design and VA’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information Technology 

Management and Chief Financial Officer for the Office of Information 

Technology. For the fourth initiative (one CPU policy), VA stated that the 

initiative was no longer a stand-alone project but had been subsumed by 

the Field Office Mobile Workers and Telework Support Agreement and 

that the economic justification for this consolidation effort had not yet 

been completed.

Officials reported that in general the lack of a strong cost estimation 

process is the main challenge the department faced in estimating cost 

savings, even though VA’s Ruthless Reduction Task Force does have a 

process in place for performing cost estimates for the initiatives that the 

task force reviews. VA officials stated that they plan to address improving 

their IT cost estimation process issue with VA’s executive leadership 

team, but did not provide a time frame for doing so. For the near term, VA 

recently hired an operations research analyst to assist IT staff who lack 

experience with cost and savings estimation activities and plans to hire 

two more analysts. Without support for its estimates, VA will have less 

assurance that it can realize planned cost savings and avoidance, and 

OMB and stakeholders will be hindered in evaluating its progress.
 

Page 33 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

OMB has outlined several planned improvements to the PortfolioStat 

process in a memo issued in March 201343 that should help strengthen 

federal IT portfolio management and address key issues we have 

identified with agencies’ efforts to implement the initiative. In particular, 

OMB has changed its reporting requirements, requiring agencies to report 

on progress made on a quarterly basis. In addition, agencies will also be 

held accountable for their portfolio management as part of annual 

PortfolioStat sessions. However, selective OMB efforts could be 

strengthened to improve the PortfolioStat process and ensure agencies 

achieve identified cost savings, including addressing issues related to 

existing CIO authority at federal agencies, and publically reporting on 

agency-provided data.

OMB’s plans identify a number of improvements that should help 

strengthen IT portfolio management and address key issues we have 

identified:

Agency reporting on PortfolioStat progress: OMB’s memorandum has 

consolidated previously collected IT plans, reports, and data calls into 

three primary collection channels—an information resources 

management strategic plan,44 an enterprise road map,45 and an integrated 

data collection channel.46 As part of this reporting requirement, agencies 

will be required to provide updates on their progress in meeting key OMB 

 

43OMB, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Fiscal Year 

2013 PortfolioStat Guidance: Strengthening Federal IT Portfolio Management, M-13-09 

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 27, 2013).

44OMB, Management of Federal Information Resources, Circular A-130 (Washington, 

D.C.: Nov. 28, 2000). According to OMB Circular A-130, an agency’s information 

resources management strategic plan should describe how information resources 

management activities help accomplish agency missions, and ensure that information 

resource management decisions are integrated with organizational planning, budget, 

procurement, financial management, human resources management, and program 

decisions. 

45OMB, Increasing Shared Approaches to Information Technology Services (Washington,

D.C.: May 2, 2012). The enterprise road map is to include a business and technology

architecture, an IT asset inventory, a commodity IT consolidation plan, a line of business

service plan, and an IT shared service plan. 

46The integrated data collection channel will be used by agencies to report structured

information, such as progress in meeting IT strategic goals, objectives, and metrics, as

well as cost savings and avoidances resulting from IT management actions. 

OMB’s Plans Outline 

PortfolioStat 

Improvements but Do 

Not Address All 

Issues with Agencies’ 

Efforts
 

Page 34 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

requirements related to portfolio management best practices, which 

address issues identified in this report.

• Agencies must describe how their investment review boards 

coordinate between investment decisions, portfolio management, EA, 

procurement, and software development methodologies to ensure that 

IT solutions meet business requirements, as well as identify areas of 

waste and duplication wherever consolidation is possible.

• Agencies are to describe the valuation methodology used in their 

governance process to comparatively evaluate investments, including 

what criteria and areas are assessed, to ensure greater consistency 

and rigor in the process of selecting, controlling, and evaluating 

investments an agency decides to fund, de-fund, or terminate.

• Agencies must report their actual and planned cost savings and 

avoidances, as well as other metrics, achieved or expected through 

the implementation of efforts such as agency migration to shared 

services and cloud solutions, the consolidation of commodity IT, and 

savings achieved through data center consolidation. In addition, 

agencies are to describe their plans to re-invest savings resulting from 

consolidations of commodity IT resources (including data centers).

In addition, agencies will now be required to report the status of their 

progress in implementing PortfolioStat on a quarterly basis. Agency 

integrated data collections were first required to be submitted in May 

2013 and will be updated quarterly beginning in August 2013, with 

subsequent updates on the last day of November, and February of each 

fiscal year. Requiring agencies to provide consolidated reports on their 

progress in meeting key initiatives should help OMB to better manage 

these initiatives.

Holding agencies accountable for portfolio management in 

PortfolioStat sessions: Moving forward, the PortfolioStat sessions held 

with agency stakeholders and OMB officials are intended to involve 

discussions of agency efforts related to several ongoing initiatives and 

their plans to implement key OMB guidance, such as guidance on CIO 

authorities, in order to help agencies mature their management of IT 

resources. Specifically, OMB plans to use the documentation and data 

submitted by the agencies in May 2013 to determine the state of each 

agency’s IT portfolio management, such as the use of an EA and 

valuation methodology, and develop areas OMB identifies as the most 

appropriate opportunities for agencies to innovate, optimize, and protect 
 

Page 35 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

systems and data. Based on the session, OMB and the agency are 

expected to identify and agree on actionable next steps and specific time 

frames for the actions to be taken, which OMB intends to formalize and 

transmit in a memorandum to the agency within 2 weeks of the completed 

session, and no later than August 31, 2013. Upon receipt of the action 

item memorandum, agency PortfolioStat leads are to work with OMB to 

establish follow-up discussions as appropriate to track progress against 

action items identified. Deviation from the committed schedule will trigger 

a requirement for follow-up briefings by the agency to the Federal CIO no 

less frequently than quarterly, until corrective actions have been 

implemented or the action item is back on schedule.

OMB’s efforts to follow up with agencies on a regular basis are critical to 

ensuring the success of these efforts. We have previously reported that 

OMB-led TechStat sessions have enabled the government to improve or 

terminate IT investments that are experiencing performance problems by 

focusing management attention on troubled projects and establishing 

clear action items to turn the projects around or terminate them.47 By 

having similar sessions focusing on agency IT portfolios, OMB can hold 

agencies accountable for their ongoing initiatives to consolidate or 

eliminate duplicative investments and achieve significant cost savings.

Improving analytical capabilities: OMB expects to collect information 

from agencies as part of PortfolioStat and use a variety of analytical 

resources to evaluate the data provided, track agency progress each 

quarter, and determine whether there are any areas for improvement to 

the process. In addition, OMB plans to provide this information to 

Congress as part of the quarterly report it is required to submit to the 

Senate and House Appropriations Committees on savings achieved by 

OMB’s government-wide IT reform efforts. Analyzing and reporting data 

on agencies’ efforts to implement the PortfolioStat initiative will help OMB 

to provide more oversight of these efforts and hold agencies accountable 

for information reported in the quarterly reports.

Although OMB’s planned improvements should help strengthen the 

PortfolioStat initiative going forward, they do not address some of the 

shortcomings with efforts to implement the initiative identified in this 

report:

 

47 GAO-13-524. 
 

Page 36 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Addressing issues with CIO authority: While OMB’s memorandum has 

indicated that agencies must now report on how their policies, 

procedures, and CIO authorities are consistent with OMB Memorandum 

11-29, “Chief Information Officer Authorities,”

48 as noted earlier, OMB’s 

prior guidance and reporting requirements have not been sufficient to 

address the implementation of CIO authority at all agencies. In addition, 

OMB’s 2013 PortfolioStat guidance does not establish deadlines or 

metrics for agencies to demonstrate the extent to which CIOs are 

exercising the authorities and responsibilities provided by the ClingerCohen Act and OMB guidance, which, as we have previously 

recommended, are needed to ensure accountability for acting on this 

issue,49 nor does it require them to disclose any limitations CIOs might 

have in their ability to exercise their authority. Until CIOs are able to 

exercise their full authority, they will be limited in their ability to implement 

PortfolioStat and other initiatives to improve IT management.

Reporting on action plan items that were not addressed: In OMB’s 

2013 memorandum, agencies are no longer required to submit separate 

commodity IT consolidation plans as in 2012 but are to identify the 

progress made in implementing portfolio improvements as part of the 

broader agency reporting requirement mentioned above. While OMB’s 

shift to requiring agencies to report on progress now is reasonable given 

the goals of PortfolioStat, it was based on the assumption that agencies 

would develop robust action plans as a foundation last year. However, as 

noted earlier, the submitted agency final action plans were incomplete in 

that they did not always address all the required elements. Going forward, 

it will be important for agencies to address the plan items required. In 

addition, until OMB requires agencies to report on the status of these 

items, it may not have assurance that these agencies’ plans for making 

portfolio improvements fully realize the benefits of the PortfolioStat 

initiative.

Ensuring agencies’ commodity IT baselines are complete, and 

reporting on the status of 2012 migration efforts: OMB’s 2013 

guidance does not require agencies to document how they verified their 

 

48OMB M-11-29 states that CIOs must be empowered by the agency head to have 

authority over IT governance, commodity IT systems, information security, and IT program 

management in order to drive efficiencies.

49GAO-11-634. 
 

Page 37 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

commodity IT baseline data or disclose any limitations of these data or to 

report on the completion of their two 2012 migration efforts. Without such 

requirements, it will be more difficult for OMB to hold agencies 

accountable for identifying and achieving potential cost savings.

Publically reporting agency PortfolioStat data: Finally, we have 

previously reported that the public display of agencies’ data allows OMB, 

other oversight bodies, and the general public to hold the agencies 

accountable for results and progress.50 While OMB officials have stated 

that they intend to make agency-reported data and the best practices 

identified for the PortfolioStat effort publicly available, they have not yet 

decided specifically which information they will report. Until OMB publicly 

reports data agencies submit on their commodity IT consolidation efforts, 

including planned and actual cost savings, it will be more difficult for 

stakeholders, including Congress and the public, to monitor agencies’ 

progress and hold them accountable for reducing duplication and 

achieving cost savings.

OMB’s PortfolioStat initiative offers opportunities to save billions of dollars 

and improve the way in which agencies manage their portfolios. While 

agencies implemented key PortfolioStat requirements, including 

establishing a commodity IT baseline and documenting a final action plan 

to consolidate commodity IT, shortcomings in their implementation of 

these requirements could undermine the savings the PortfolioStat effort is 

expected to achieve. First, reported limitations in CIOs exercising 

authority over the IT portfolios at six of the agencies suggests that more 

needs to be done to empower CIOs to improve management and 

oversight of agency IT resources. Second, not including all IT investments 

in their EA or developing complete commodity IT baselines limits 

agencies’ ability to identify further opportunities for reducing wasteful, 

duplicative, or low-value investments. Third, not addressing key elements 

in action plans for implementing the PortfolioStat initiative increases the 

likelihood that agencies will not achieve all the intended benefits. Finally, 

following through on commitments to migrate or consolidate investments 

is critical to ensuring accountability for results. Regarding estimated 

savings and cost avoidance, the significant understatement—by at least 

 

50GAO, Information Technology: OMB’s Dashboard Has Increased Transparency and 

Oversight, but Improvements Needed, GAO-10-701 (Washington, D.C.: July 2010). 

Conclusions 
 

Page 38 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

$2.8 billion—of OMB’s reported figures highlights the importance of 

ensuring the accuracy of data and disclosing any limitations or 

qualifications on reported savings.

The identification by five agencies—the Departments of Agriculture, 

Defense, the Interior, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs—of 52 initiatives 

and more than $3.7 billion in potential cost savings or avoidance through 

fiscal year 2015 demonstrates the significant potential of portfolio 

improvements to yield ongoing benefits. Making greater use of their EA 

and valuation model to identify consolidation opportunities, as 

recommended by OMB, could assist agencies in identifying additional 

opportunities. In addition, better support for the estimates of cost savings 

associated with the opportunities identified would increase the likelihood 

that these savings will be achieved.

OMB’s planned improvements to the PortfolioStat process outlined in its 

March 2013 guidance—such as streamlining agency reporting on 

progress in implementing the process and holding agencies accountable 

for these efforts in PortfolioStat sessions—should help the office provide 

better oversight and management of government-wide efforts to 

consolidate commodity IT. However, OMB’s plans do not address key 

issues identified in this report, which could strengthen the PortfolioStat 

process. In particular, addressing issues of CIO authority by working 

directly with agency leadership to establish time lines and metrics for 

implementing existing guidance, requiring agencies to report on the 

reliability of their commodity baseline data and the progress of all their 

consolidation efforts, and making data on agencies’ progress in 

consolidating commodity IT and achieving cost savings publicly available 

will be essential to PortfolioStat’s success in reducing duplication and 

maximizing the return on investment in federal IT.

To help ensure the success of PortfolioStat, we are making six 

recommendations to OMB. We recommend that the Director of the Office 

of Management and Budget and the Federal Chief Information Officer 

require agencies to fully disclose limitations their CIOs might have in 

exercising the authorities and responsibilities provided by law and OMB’s 

guidance. Particular attention should be paid to the Departments of 

Health and Human Services, and State; the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration; the Office of Personnel Management; and the U.S. 

Agency for International Development, which reported specific limitations 

with the CIO’s authority.

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
 

Page 39 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

In addition, we recommend that the Director of the Office of Management 

and Budget direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to

• require that agencies (1) state what actions have been taken to 

ensure the completeness of their commodity IT baseline information 

and (2) identify any limitation with this information as part of integrated 

data collection quarterly reporting;

• require agencies to report on the progress of their two consolidation 

efforts that were to be completed by December 2012 as part of the 

integrated data collection quarterly reporting; 

• disclose the limitations of any data reported (or disclose the 

parameters and assumptions of these data) on the agencies’ 

consolidation efforts and associated savings and cost avoidance;

• require that agencies report on efforts to address action plan items as 

part of future PortfolioStat reporting; and

• Improve transparency of and accountability for PortfolioStat by 

publicly disclosing planned and actual data consolidation efforts and 

related cost savings by agency. 

We are also making 58 recommendations to 24 of the 26 departments 

and agencies in our review to improve their implementation of 

PortfolioStat requirements. Appendix IV contains these 

recommendations.

We provided a draft of this report to OMB and the 26 executive agencies 

in our review for comment and received responses from all 27. Of the 27, 

12 agreed with our recommendations directed to them, 5 disagreed or 

partially disagreed with our recommendations directed to them, 4 

provided additional clarifying information, and 6 (the Departments of 

Education, Labor, Transportation, and Treasury; the Small Business 

Administration; and the U.S. Agency for International Development) 

stated that they had no comments.51 Several agencies also provided 

technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. The 

agencies’ comments and our responses are summarized below. 

 

51We did not make any recommendations to the Department of Education. 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 40 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• In e-mail comments from the Federal Chief Information Officer, OMB 

generally agreed with three of our recommendations and disagreed 

with three. Specifically, OMB agreed with the recommendation to 

require agencies to disclose limitations their CIOs might have in 

exercising the authorities and responsibilities provided by law and 

OMB guidance but stated that it had already addressed this issue as 

part of its fiscal year 2013 PortfolioStat process. Specifically, 

according to OMB, its fiscal year 2013 PortfolioStat guidance52

required agencies to describe how their policies, procedures, and 

authorities implement CIO authorities, consistent with OMB 

Memorandum 11-29, as part of either the information resources 

management plan or enterprise roadmap they were instructed to 

submit. OMB stated that it reviewed and analyzed agencies’ 

responses and discussed limitations to CIOs’ authorities directly with 

agencies during the PortfolioStat sessions in cases where it

determined that such limitations existed. However, OMB did not 

provide documentation supporting its reviews or discussions with 

agencies. In addition, as we note in our report, requiring agencies to 

fully disclose limitations their CIOs may have in exercising the 

authorities and responsibilities provided by law and OMB guidance 

should provide OMB information crucial to understanding and 

addressing the factors that could prevent agencies from successfully 

implementing the PortfolioStat initiative. For these reasons, we are 

maintaining our recommendation.

OMB stated that it agreed with our recommendation to require that 

agencies (1) state what actions have been taken to ensure the 

completeness of their commodity IT baseline information and (2) 

identify any limitations with this information as part of the integrated 

data collection quarterly reporting. It acknowledged the value in 

ensuring the completeness and in understanding the limitations of 

agency-produced artifacts and stated it would continue to dedicate 

resources to validating agency savings associated with federal IT 

reform efforts prior to presenting these savings to Congress. OMB 

also stated that it would modify its analytical process to cite these 

limitations when producing PortfolioStat reports in the future. 

OMB generally agreed with the recommendation to require agencies 

to report on the progress of the two consolidation efforts they were to 

 

52OMB M-13-09.
 

Page 41 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

complete by December 2012 and stated that, to the extent feasible, it 

would dedicate resources to analyzing this information.

OMB disagreed with our recommendation to disclose the limitations of 

any data reported on the agencies’ consolidation efforts and 

associated cost savings and avoidance, stating that it had disclosed 

limitations on data reported and citing three instances of these efforts. 

While we acknowledge that OMB reported limitations of data 

regarding consolidation efforts in these cases, the information 

reported did not provide stakeholders and the public with a complete 

understanding of the information presented. For example, OMB did 

not disclose that information from the departments of Defense and 

Justice was not included in the consolidation estimates reported, 

which, considering the scope of Defense’s efforts in this area (at least 

$3.2 billion), is a major gap. As noted in our report, OMB’s disclosure 

of limitations of or qualifications to the data it reports would provide 

the public and other stakeholders with crucial information needed to 

understand the status of PortfolioStat and agency progress in meeting 

the goals of the initiative. Therefore, we stand by our 

recommendation. 

OMB also disagreed with our recommendation to require agencies to 

report on efforts to address action plan elements as part of future 

OMB reporting, stating that it had found that 24 of 26 agencies had 

completed their plans. OMB further stated that it continuously follows 

up on the consolidation efforts identified in the plans and, where 

savings have been identified, reports this progress to Congress on a 

quarterly basis. However, our review of the 26 agency action plans 

found 26 instances where a required element (e.g., consolidation of 

commodity IT spending under the CIO) was not addressed and 26 

instances where a required element was only partially addressed--an 

assessment with which agencies agreed. As noted in our report, 

addressing all the required elements would better position agencies to 

fully realize the intended benefits of the PortfolioStat initiative, and 

they should therefore be held accountable for reporting on them as 

required in OMB memo M-12-10. Accordingly, we stand by our 

recommendation. 

Finally, OMB disagreed with our recommendation to improve 

transparency and accountability for PortfolioStat by disclosing 

consolidation efforts and related cost savings by agency. Specifically, 

OMB stated that this recommendation does not adequately account 

for the work it currently performs to ensure accountability for and 

transparency of the process through its quarterly reporting of identified 
 

Page 42 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

savings to Congress. It further stated that some details are 

deliberative or procurement sensitive and it would therefore not be 

appropriate to disclose them. However, while OMB currently reports 

realized savings by agency on a quarterly basis, these savings are not 

measured against planned savings. Doing this would greatly enhance 

Congress’s insight into agencies’ progress and hold them accountable 

for reducing duplication and achieving planned cost savings and 

would not require reporting deliberative or procurement-sensitive 

information. Therefore, we stand by our recommendation. 

• In written comments, the U.S. Department of Agriculture concurred 

with the content of our report. The department’s comments are 

reprinted in appendix V.

• In written comments, the Department of Commerce concurred with 

our recommendations but disagreed with our statement that the CIO 

only has explicit authority over major IT investments. Commerce cited 

a June 21, 2012, departmental memo on IT portfolio management that 

it believes provides the CIO with explicit authority to review any IT 

investment, whether major or non-major. Our statement regarding the 

limitations on the CIO’s authority was based on information reported 

by the department to OMB in May 2012 and confirmed with officials 

from the Commerce Office of the CIO during the course of our review. 

However, we agree that the June 2012 memo provides the CIO with 

explicit authority to review all IT investments. Accordingly, we have 

removed the original statement noting limitations from the report and 

also removed Commerce from the list of departments OMB should 

require to disclose CIO limitations. The Department of Commerce’s 

comments are reprinted in appendix VI.

• In its written response, the Department of Defense provided 

comments for both the department and the Army Corps of Engineers. 

It concurred with one of the three recommendations made to Defense, 

partially concurred with another and disagreed with the third. 

Specifically, the department concurred with our recommendation to 

obtain support from the relevant component agencies for the 

estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 to 2015 for the data center 

consolidation, enterprise software purchasing, and General Fund 

Enterprise Business System initiatives. It partially concurred with our 

recommendation to develop a complete commodity baseline, stating 

that the department has efforts under way to further refine the 

baseline. Since these efforts have not yet been completed, we are 

maintaining our recommendation. The department did not concur with 
 

Page 43 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

our recommendation to fully describe the consolidation of commodity 

IT spending under the CIO in future OMB reporting. The department 

stated that it did not intend to follow OMB’s guidance to consolidate 

commodity IT spending under the CIO because this approach would 

not work within the department’s federated management process. 

However, our recommendation was not to implement OMB’s 

guidance, but rather to address the element in the plan as required by 

either describing the steps it will take to implement it or explaining why 

it will not or cannot implement it. DOD did neither of these and instead 

was silent on the subject. We therefore stand by our recommendation. 

The department concurred with both of the recommendations we 

made to the Army Corps of Engineers. The department’s comments 

are reprinted in appendix VII.

• In written comments, the Department of Energy concurred with our 

recommendation to fully describe PortfolioStat action plan elements in 

future OMB reporting and stated that the department was committed 

to increasing the CIO’s oversight and authority for federal commodity 

IT investments. The department also noted that our statement that the 

“department has no direct authority over IT investments in two semiautonomous agencies (the National Nuclear Security Administration 

and the Energy Information Administration)” should be clarified to say 

that it is the department CIO who does not have this authority. We 

found support for this clarification in documentation we had already 

received and therefore made it as requested. The department’s 

comments are reprinted in appendix VIII. 

• In written comments, the Environmental Protection Agency generally 

agreed with two of the three recommendations we made and 

generally disagreed with the third. Specifically, the Environmental 

Protection Agency generally agreed with our recommendations to (1) 

fully describe three PortfolioStat action plan elements and (2) report 

on the agency’s progress in consolidating the managed print services 

and strategic sourcing of end user computing to shared services as 

part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until 

completed. The agency disagreed with our recommendation to 

develop a complete commodity IT baseline, stating that it had 

provided a complete baseline to OMB on August 31, 2012, and had 

also reported to us during our review that the information was current 

and complete at the time of submission. During our review, we found 

that the Environmental Protection Agency did not have a process in 

place to ensure the completeness of the information in the baseline. 

Without appropriate controls and processes in place to confirm this, 
 

Page 44 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

the Environmental Protection Agency cannot be assured that its data 

are complete. We therefore stand by our recommendation. The 

Environmental Protection Agency’s comments are reprinted in 

appendix IX.

• In written comments, the General Services Administration agreed with 

our findings and recommendations and stated it would take action as 

appropriate. The agency’s comments are reprinted in appendix X.

• In written comments, the Department of Homeland Security disagreed 

with our recommendation to fully describe its efforts related to 

consolidating commodity IT spending under the CIO in future OMB 

reporting, stating that the department had already addressed this 

recommendation. Specifically, the department stated that it had 

included updated information on this topic in its fiscal year 2013 

Information Resources Management Plan that was submitted to OMB 

in May 2013. We reviewed the Information Resources Management 

Plan and agree that it addresses our recommendation. We therefore 

removed the recommendation from the report. The department’s 

comments are reprinted in appendix XI. 

• In written comments, the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development concurred with our recommendations and stated it 

would provide more definitive information with timelines once the final 

report had been issued. The department’s comments are reprinted in 

appendix XII. 

• In e-mail comments, the Department of the Interior’s GAO Audit 

Liaison stated that the department generally concurred with our 

findings and recommendations. However, the department 

recommended revising the criteria we used to assess whether 

agencies met the requirement to develop a commodity IT baseline 

(depicted in table 1) to reflect whether or not an agency had 

developed a baseline instead of whether that baseline was complete. 

The department stated that a validation was not being performed on 

how all agencies responded to the question and agencies that 

answered truthfully were being penalized for responding honestly. We 

recognize that agencies were not required to report on the 

completeness of the commodity IT baseline information they 

submitted to OMB; for this reason, we have recommended that OMB 

require agencies to state what actions have been taken to ensure the 

completeness of their commodity IT baseline information and identify 

any limitations with this information as part of the integrated data 

collection quarterly reporting.
 

Page 45 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• In e-mail comments, an official from the Department of Justice’s Audit 

Liaison Group stated that all references to the department were 

factually correct.

• In written comments, the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration concurred with our recommendations and noted the 

agency will take actions to address them. The agency’s comments are 

reprinted in appendix XIII. 

• In written comments, the National Archives and Records 

Administration concurred with our recommendation and stated that it 

would include updated or new descriptions of the elements of the 

PortfolioStat action plan in future OMB reporting. The agency’s 

comments are reprinted in appendix XIV. 

• In written comments, the National Science Foundation stated that it 

generally agreed with our characterization of the agency’s 

PortfolioStat status and would update its PortfolioStat action plan as 

appropriate to more fully describe the two elements that we noted 

were not fully addressed. Regarding our recommendation to complete 

the consolidation of e-mail services to shared services, the agency 

stated that this effort was completed in August 2013. After reviewing 

additional documentation provided, we agree that the agency has met 

the requirement. We modified the report as appropriate, and removed 

the recommendation. The National Science Foundation’s comments 

are reprinted in appendix XV. 

• In e-mail comments, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s GAO 

Audit Liaison stated that the agency was generally in agreement with 

our report. 

• In written comments, the Office of Personnel Management concurred 

with our recommendations and noted that the agency will provide 

updated information on efforts to address them to OMB on November 

30, 2013. The agency’s comments are reprinted in appendix XVI.

• In written comments, the Social Security Administration agreed with 

one recommendation and disagreed with the other. The agency 

disagreed with our recommendation to develop a complete commodity 

IT baseline, stating that it believed its commodity baseline data to be 

complete and accurate. However, our review found that the Social 

Security Administration did not have a process in place to ensure the 

completeness of the information in the baseline. Without appropriate 

controls and processes in place to confirm the completeness of data, 
 

Page 46 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

the Social Security Administration cannot be assured that its data are 

complete. The agency also acknowledged that it needed to document 

a process for demonstrating the completeness of its baseline data. 

Consequently, we stand by our recommendation. The Social Security 

Administration’s comments are reprinted in appendix XVII.

• In written comments, the Department of State stated that it concurred 

with our report and would develop specific responses to each of the 

three recommendations we made once the report is published. 

However, related to our recommendation to complete the 

consolidation of the Foreign Affairs Network and content publishing 

and delivery services, the department stated that it has already 

consolidated more than two commodity IT areas per OMB 

Memorandum M-11-29. While we acknowledge that it has made 

efforts in this area, during our review the department changed what it 

considered the two commodity areas to be consolidated by December 

2012 several times before stating that the two efforts were the Foreign 

Affairs Network and content publishing and delivery services. Based 

on this determination, we assessed the status of these two efforts and 

confirmed that neither had been completed as of August 2013. In 

addition, the department did not provide any documentation to support 

that it had consolidated more than two commodity IT areas. We 

therefore stand by our recommendation. The Department of State’s 

comments are reprinted in appendix XVIII. 

• In written comments, the Department of Veterans Affairs concurred 

with our four recommendations, stating the department is taking steps 

to manage its investment portfolio more effectively and has developed 

an action plan to address each recommendation. The department’s 

comments are reprinted in appendix XIX.

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional 

committees, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the 

secretaries and agency heads of the departments and agencies 

addressed in this report, and other interested parties. In addition, the 

report will be available at no charge on GAO’s website at 

http://www.gao.gov.
 

Page 47 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

If you or your staffs have any questions on the matters discussed in this 

report, please contact me at (202) 512-9286 or pownerd@gao.gov. 

Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public 

Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made 

major contributions to this report are listed in appendix XX. 

David A. Powner

Director, Information Technology

 Management Issues
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 48 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Our objectives were to (1) determine the status of efforts to implement 

key required PortfolioStat actions, (2) evaluate selected agencies’ plans 

for making portfolio improvements and achieving associated cost savings, 

and (3) evaluate Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) plans to 

improve the PortfolioStat process.

To determine the status of agency efforts to implement key PortfolioStat 

actions, we obtained and analyzed policies, action plans, PortfolioStat 

briefing slides, status reports, agency communications to OMB, and other 

documentation relative to the key requirements of the Portfolio initiative 

outlined in OMB’s 2012 memorandum1 from each of the 26 federal 

agencies in our review.2 These requirements included (1) designating a 

lead for the initiative; (2) completing a high-level IT portfolio survey; (3) 

establishing a commodity IT baseline; (4) holding a PortfolioStat session; 

(5) submitting a final plan to consolidate commodity IT; (6) migrating at 

least two duplicative commodity IT services by December 31, 2012; (7) 

and documenting lessons learned. For the final plan to consolidate 

commodity IT, we reviewed agency plans to determine whether each 

element required in the plan was fully addressed. A “partially” rating was 

given if the plan addressed a portion but not all of the information required 

in the element. In addition, we obtained a briefing book which OMB 

provided to the agencies that, among other things, summarized the 

agencies’ commodity IT baseline data. We assessed the reliability of 

OMB’s reporting of these data through interviews with OMB officials 

regarding their processes for compiling the briefing books and used the 

briefing books to describe the federal investment in commodity IT at the 

time of the 2012 PortfolioStat. We also assessed the reliability of 

agencies’ commodity IT baseline data by reviewing the processes 

agencies described they had in place to ensure that all investments were 

captured in the baseline. We identified issues with the reliability of the 

 

1

OMB, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: 

Implementing PortfolioStat, M-12-10 (Mar. 30, 2012).

2

These agencies are the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, 

Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban 

Development, the Interior, Justice, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and 

Veterans Affairs; the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Archives and Records 

Administration, National Science Foundation, Office of Personnel Management, Small 

Business Administration, Social Security Administration, U.S. Agency for International 

Development, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 49 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

agencies’ commodity IT baseline data and have highlighted these issues 

throughout this report, as appropriate.

For objective two, we selected five agencies with (1) high fiscal year IT 

expenditure levels (based on information reported on the OMB’s IT 

dashboard); (2) a mix of varying IT and CIO organizational structures 

(centralized vs. decentralized); and (3) a range of investment 

management maturity levels based on knowledge gathered from prior 

work and reported results of PortfolioStat sessions. In addition, to the 

extent possible, we avoided selecting projects that were the subject of 

another engagement underway. The agencies selected are the 

Departments of Agriculture, Defense, the Interior, the Treasury, and 

Veterans Affairs. To evaluate the selected agencies’ plans for making 

portfolio improvements and achieving associated cost savings, we 

obtained and analyzed agencies’ action plans to consolidate commodity 

IT, and other relevant documentation, and interviewed relevant agency 

officials to compile a list of planned portfolio improvements and determine 

the processes agencies used to identify these portfolio improvements. We 

determined the extent to which these processes included using (1) the 

agency enterprise architecture and (2) a valuation model, which OMB 

recommended in its guidance to assist in analyzing portfolio information 

and developing action plans. In addition, we assessed the reliability of the 

cost savings and avoidance estimates by obtaining and analyzing the 

support for the estimates for the two efforts that were to be migrated by 

December 2012 and the two efforts with the highest anticipated savings 

between fiscal years 2013 and 2015. Based on the results of our analysis, 

we found the data to be sufficiently reliable given the way they are 

reported herein.

To evaluate OMB’s plans for making PortfolioStat improvements, we 

reviewed PortfolioStat guidance for fiscal year 20133 and interviewed 

OMB officials to compile a list of planned improvements. In addition, we 

analyzed the information obtained from our sources and the results of our 

analyses for our first two objectives to determine whether OMB’s plans for 

improving PortfolioStat addressed the issues we identified.

 

3

OMB, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Fiscal Year 

2013 PortfolioStat Guidance: Strengthening Federal IT Portfolio Management, M-13-09 

(Mar. 27, 2013).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 50 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

We conducted this performance audit from October 2012 to November

2013 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix II: Agencies’ Commodity IT Migration 

Efforts

Page 51 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

The table below lists the commodity IT efforts for migration to shared 

services agencies identified in their action plan.

Agency Efforts for migration to shared services 

Agriculture Cellular Phone Contract Consolidation

Enterprise Contracts for Standardized Security Products and 

Services Plan

Commerce Cyber Security Assessment and Management Re-host at the 

Department of Justice

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Consolidated 

National Service Desk

Endpoint Security Blanket Purchase Agreement

Shared Services Freedom of Information Act Module Portal 

Defense The Unclassified Information Sharing Service/All Partner Access 

Network

The General Fund Enterprise Business System

Education Information Collection Request, Review and Approval System

Kronos Time & Attendance

Energy Electronic Capital Planning and Investment Control (eCPIC) 

Migration to General Services Administration Cloud Environment

Energy Services Online Pilot Implementation 

Environmental 

Protection Agency

Managed print services

Strategic sourcing of end user computing

General Services 

Administration

Insite 

Contract writing module

Health and Human 

Services 

Healthdata.gov Services 

Information Collection Request, Review and Approval Services 

Homeland Security WorkPlace as a Service

Case and Relationship Management as a Service 

Housing and Urban 

Development

Human Resource End to End Solution

MicroStrategy Enterprise Licensing / Business Intelligence 

Interior Financial and Business Management System deployment 7

Enterprise Forms System

Justice Wireless

Land Mobile Radio System Consolidation 

Labor Cloud e-mail

Web-based collaboration tool 

Appendix II: Agencies’ Commodity IT 

Migration Efforts
Appendix II: Agencies’ Commodity IT Migration 

Efforts

Page 52 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Agency Efforts for migration to shared services 

National Aeronautics 

and Space 

Administration

NASA Integrated Communications Services Consolidated 

Configuration Management System

Consolidation of Adobe Lifecycle Reader Extension Service

National Archives and 

Records 

Administration

Moving website and census data to shared service provider

Moving e-mail to shared services

National Science 

Foundation

Email to cloud

Web Time & Attendance

Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission

Workforce Tracking Transformation system

Entrance on Duty System

Office of Personnel 

Management

Help Desk consolidation

IT asset inventory

Small Business 

Administration

Electronic Capital Planning and Investment Control (eCPIC) 

Portfolio Management tool (FESCOM Program Participant)

FDOnline

Social Security 

Administration

Enterprise social media

Geospatial architecture

State Foreign Affairs Network

Content publishing and delivery services

Transportation Enterprise Messaging

Systems and Managed Print Services and Multi-function printer 

devices

Treasury Internet Payment Platform

Do Not Pay

U.S. Agency for 

International 

Development

Google/Email

Telecommunications and Computer Operations Center

U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers

Electronic Capital Planning and Investment Control (eCPIC)

USACE Learning Network

Veterans Affairs Server Virtualization

Eliminate Dedicated Fax Servers Consolidation

Source: GAO analysis of agency data.
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 53 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

The table below lists the commodity IT initiatives that agencies identified 

in the cost target templates provided to OMB in September 2012. 

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Dollars in millions (rounded)

Agriculture

Infrastructure Consolidation $61.10 $64.80 $78.30 $204.20

Tier 1 Help Desk 1.21 1.21 1.21 3.63

Geo Spatial Consolidation 10.53 20.60 30.03 61.16

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 72.84 86.61 109.54 268.99 

Commerce

Desktop/Laptop Management 1.20 1.20 1.20 3.60

Several Data Center Consolidation Activities 0.00 5.40 29.30 34.70

Reduce total number of computers, use Commerce PC purchase 

contract to get discount. 0.38 0.38 0.38 1.14

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Service 

Desk 1.80 1.80 1.80 5.40

Enterprise-Wide IT Security Assessment and Authorization 1.80 1.80 1.80 5.40

Human Resources Management System 3.01 6.02 6.63 15.66

National Institute of Standards and Technology Cloud Initiatives 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Voice over Internet Protocol 0.00 0.00 1.90 1.90

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 8.19 16.60 43.01 67.80 

Defense

Branch Services Consolidation of Commodity IT Components and 

Applications

a

n.d. n.d. b n.d. n.d.

Mobile Device Strategy n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Next Generation End User Devices n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Multi-level Security Domain Thin Client Solutions n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Defense Enterprise Software Initiative n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Consolidation Procurement of Commodity IT Hardware Purchases n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Green IT n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Unclassified Information Sharing Service / All Partner Access Network n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Consolidate Security Infrastructure n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Consolidate NetOps Centers n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Implement Cross Domain Solution as Enterprise Service n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 54 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Extended Joint Networks Over Satellite Communications n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Video Over Internet Protocol Enterprise Service n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Joint Enterprise Network n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Defense Red Switch Network Rationalization n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Data Center Consolidation n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Computing Infrastructure and Services Optimization n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Cloud Computing n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Service Desk Consolidation n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Enterprise Messaging and Collaboration Services n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Identify and Access Management Services n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Enterprises Services – Identify and Access Management n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Streamline Records Management n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Defense Interoperability with Mission Partners n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

General Fund Enterprise Business System n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Common Business Process Foundation n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 3,200.00– 

5,300.00

Education

Information Collection Request, Review and Approval System 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.45

Kronos Time & Attendance 0.56 0.33 0.33 1.22

ABLEDATA 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08

cVent Event Solutions 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02

Fund for the Improvement of PostSecondary Education Dissemination 

and Grants Database 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.08

Improving Program Performance 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.08

Literacy Information and Communication System Technical Services 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.32

Migrant Student Information Exchange 0.36 0.37 0.37 1.10

National Rehabilitation Information Center 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.07

Records Exchange Advice, Communication and Technical Support 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Presidential Scholars Program 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.06

Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Websites 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

Doing What Works Website 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.14

Education Pubs 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.10

eService Center 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 55 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Office of the Chief Financial Officer Grants Information Award 

Database Internet Site 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02

Enterprise Intranet (connectED) 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.32

Education Web 0.48 0.36 0.36 1.20

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 2.02 1.63 1.63 5.28 

Energy

Commodity IT Contract Consolidation 2.12 2.12 2.12 6.35

Utilization of Energy Master Contract 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.23

Enhanced Connectivity for Telework and Travel 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.08

Public Key Infrastructure Migration to Shared Service Provider 0.90 0.90 0.90 2.70

Email Consolidation 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.72

Collaboration Tools Consolidation (Microsoft SharePoint) 0.40 0.40 0.60 1.40

IT Security 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.72

Document Management Consolidation 0.15 0.18 0.22 0.55

Migration on-premise Exchange Services into Cloud 365 offering 0.00 0.30 0.30 0.60

Energy.gov Renewal Project 1.00 2.00 3.00 6.00

Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center - Commodity IT Full Time 

Equivalent Reduction 0.23 0.23 0.46 0.92

Network Infrastructure 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.60

Server and Storage Consolidation 0.40 0.40 0.40 1.20

eCPIC Migration to General Services Administration Cloud 

Environment 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.35

Implement CISCO Unified Communication & Collaboration 1.90 2.30 2.60 6.80

ITSM Replacement of Office of the Chief Information Officer Remedy 

systems with ServiceNow 0.48 0.50 0.52 1.50

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 8.21 10.36 12.15 30.72 

Environmental Protection Agency

Email (Software as a Service) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Collaboration Tools (Software as a Service) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total reported savings 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

General Services Administration

External Services Branch Consolidation 1.88 1.96 5.88 9.72

Identity Credentials and Access Management .40 .97 1.55 2.92

Insite (.16) .36 .36 .56

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 2.12 3.29 7.79 13.20
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 56 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Health and Human Services

Human Resources Consolidation and Migration to Shared Service 

Provider 0.00 TBD TBD 0.00

Email Migration to E-mail as a Service Provider 0.00 TBD TBD 0.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Homeland Security

Email as a Service 18.83 48.40 48.40 115.63

Workplace as a Service 73.39 153.80 153.80 380.99

Networx Annual Cost Avoidance 85.60 85.60 85.60 256.80

Enterprise Licensing Agreements 125.33 125.33 125.33 375.99

Wireless 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00

Homeland Security Data Center Consolidation 24.40 24.40 24.40 73.20

Identify, Credential, and Access Management 2.40 2.40 2.40 7.20

Transportation Security Administration Transportation Threat 

Assessment and Credentialing/Infrastructure Modernization Program 12.00 12.00 12.00 36.00

Office of the Chief Information Officer/Enterprise System Development 

Office – Expected reduction in HQ operational expenditures 0.00 4.00 4.00 8.00

Web Content Management as a Service 0.00 18.00 18.00 36.00

Enterprise Content Delivery as a Service Cost Avoidance 6.00 6.00 6.00 18.00

SharePoint as a Service 2.16 2.16 2.16 6.48

GeoSpatial (Enterprise IT Services) 16.75 16.75 16.75 50.25

Homeland Security Information Network 1.41 1.41 1.41 4.22

Case and Relationship Management as a Service 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 369.27 501.25 501.25 1,371.77 

Housing and Urban Development

Human Resource End to End Solution 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.71

Standard Business Intelligence 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.93

Email to the Cloud 1.32 1.32 1.32 3.96

Microsoft Enterprise Software Licensing 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 2.87 2.87 2.86 8.60

Interior

Networx 7.30 7.30 7.30 21.90

Circuit Consolidation 0.90 0.90 0.90 2.70

Cloud Email and Collaboration Services 4.52 4.52 4.52 13.56
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 57 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Enterprise eArchive System part of eMail Enterprise Records and 

Document Management System 3.80 3.80 3.80 11.40

Financial and Business Management System deployment 7&8 1.30 4.13 0.00 5.43

Enterprise Forms System 2.30 2.30 2.30 6.90

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 20.12 22.95 18.82 61.89 

Justicec

Consolidation of Classified Processing Services n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Consolidating number of email systems n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Human Resource System initiatives n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Web Time and Attendance Cloud Solution n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Wireless contract consolidation n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Justice Management Division Mobility-Virtual Private Network n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Consolidation of Justice Land Mobile Radio Systems n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Monitoring at two security operations centers n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Telecommunications savings initiatives n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Unified 

Communications n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Strategic sourcing (contract escalations) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Network Delivery Order for CISCO services n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 35.00

Labor

DOLNet Network Infrastructure consolidation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Managed Trusted Internet Protocol Service 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative 0.00 0.34 0.67 1.01

E Grants-Related Federal Financial Assistance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Cloud Email 0.00 1.40– 2.70 1.40– 2.70 2.80–5.40

Labor Human Resources Works 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

HR Works

Formerly Human Resources Line of Business Shared Service Center 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 0.50 1.00 3.00 4.50

Contractor Personnel System 0.50 0.75 1.00 2.25

New Core Financial Management System 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Web content management and hosting consolidation 0.00 2.00 2.79 4.79

Web content HTML editors 0.75 3.10 3.10 6.95

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 1.75 8.59–9.89 11.96–13.26 22.30–24.90 
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 58 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Consolidated Corporated Operations Network Center 0.00 1.66 2.21 3.87

IT Security 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Collaboration Tools 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Agency Consolidated End User Services 18.85 19.23 19.61 57.69

NASA Integrated Communication Services Consolidated Configuration 

Management System 0.00 2.24 2.99 5.23

Consolidation of Adobe Life Cycle Reader Extension Service 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.49

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 19.02 23.29 24.97 67.29 

National Archives and Records Administration

Human Resources Service Center Migration -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.06

Web Hosting of the 1940 Decennial Census 0.00 0.00 3.29 3.29

Web Hosting of Archives.gov 0.00 0.00 3.20 3.20

Total reported savings and cost avoidance -0.02 -0.02 6.47 6.43 

National Science Foundation

Email to Cloud 0.27 0.24 0.24 0.75

Web Time & Attendance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 0.27 0.24 0.24 0.75 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

IPiSS PIV Legacy Modernization Savings 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.92

Security and Forensics Efficiencies 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.34

Streamline Multiple Web Content Publications through centralized Web 

content solution

0.00 1.25 0.00 1.25

Electronic Information Exchange 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02

Data Center Outsourcing 0.00 4.06 0.00 4.06

Consolidating Video Conferencing 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50

Famis Rehosting / E-Travel new contract 0.00 2.42 0.00 2.42

HR Management System 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 0.00 9.60 0.00 9.60 

Office of Personnel Management

Mobile Device and Service Plan Consolidation 0.00 1.50 0.00 1.50

Printer Consolidation 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 0.00 3.50 0.00 3.50 
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 59 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Small Business Administration

Data Center migration to shared center 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SBA Mobility 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.31

Learning Management System aka Integrated Talent Management 

System = LMS (Learning Management System) + PM (Performance 

Management) $265k 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.09

WFA aka Workforce Analytics or Workforce Planning $535k 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.09

eCPIC Portfolio Management Tool (FESCOM Program Participant) 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.30

FDonline 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 0.43 0.37 0.00 0.79 

Social Security Administration

Mainframe hardware and maintenance, TN3270 rollout to the field 0.00 0.68 0.00 0.68

SSA workforce consolidation and improvement 6.65 6.65 6.65 19.95

Disability Case Processing System implementation 0.00 0.31 1.55 1.86

Enterprise desktop refresh 0.00 58.74 0.00 58.74

Consolidation of Open Systems 0.58 0.58 0.58 1.74

Mainframe hardware and maintenance 0.00 22.35 0.00 22.35

Software maintenance 0.00 60.84 0.00 60.84

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 7.23 150.15 8.78 166.16 

State 

Strategic Sourcing Initiative 0.00 5.00 1.00 6.00

Global IT Modernization 0.00 5.00 1.00 6.00

Enterprise licensing software 0.00 5.00 1.00 6.00

Printer Managed Service 0.00 5.00 3.00 8.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 0.00 20.00 6.00 26.00 

Transportation

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration SharePoint Server 

Migration 0.00 0.00 TBD 0.00

Pipeline and Hazardous Safety Materials Administration SharePoint 

Migration 0.00 0.04 TBD 0.04

Transportation Common Operating Environment SharePoint 2007 

Decommissioning 0.00 0.07 TBD 0.07

Federal Railroad Administration Correspondence Control Management 

System Migration to Departmental Solution 0.00 0.08 TBD 0.08

Transportation Common Operating Environment SharePoint 2010 

Migration to EMS Solution 0.00 0.50 TBD 0.50
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 60 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Pipeline and Hazardous Safety Materials Administration Migration to 

Shared Solution 0.00 0.09 TBD 0.09

National Highway Transportation Safety Administration Transition to 

the DOT Common Operating Environment 0.00 0.19 TBD 0.19

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Migration to Enterprise 

Web 0.00 0.38 TBD 0.38

Transportation Common Operating Environment Legacy Migration to 

Cloud 0.00 0.50 TBD 0.50

Research and Innovative Technology Administration Web Deployment 

in the Cloud 0.00 0.10 TBD 0.10

Transportation IBM BigFix 0.00 TBD TBD 0.00

Federal Highway Administration National Highway Institute Web Portal 

& Course Management Consolidation to Reduce IT Security 0.00 0.11 TBD 0.11

Federal Highway Administration IT Security Process Improvements 0.00 2.54 TBD 2.54

Transportation COE Wireless Reinvest in DOT-wide Solution 0.00 1.06 TBD 1.06

Federal Railroad Administration Mobile Workforce Initiative Wireless 

Services 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.17

Transportation Common Operating Environment Migration from 

Current Host Provider 0.00 2.24 TBD 2.24

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Virtualization of Server 

Environment 0.00 0.16 TBD 0.16

National Highway Transportation Safety Administration Teleprocessing 

and Timesharing Services for the National Driver Register Program 

Cloud Hosting 0.00 2.46 TBD 2.46

National Highway Transportation Safety Administration Common IT 

Services Transition to Cloud-Based Hosting 0.00 3.13 TBD 3.13

Transportation Common Operating Environment De-Duplication Project 0.84 0.85 TBD 1.69

Research and Innovative Technology Administration Server Migration 

and Consolidation Initiative 0.17 0.40 TBD 0.57

Federal Aviation Administration Email 13.40 12.00 TBD 25.40

Transportation Common Operating Environment Email 0.00 4.50 TBD 4.50

Transportation Headquarters Migration to FAA SAVES MFP Contract 0.00 5.00 TBD 5.00

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 14.40 36.57 0.00 50.98 

Treasury

Internet Payment Platform 5.00 25.00 35.00 65.00

DoNotPay 19.03 42.75 66.00 127.78

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 24.03 67.75 101.00 192.78 
Appendix III: Agencies’ Portfolio Initiatives

Page 61 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Initiative

Fiscal year 

2013 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Fiscal year 

2014 

estimated

savings or 

cost 

avoidance 

Fiscal year 

2015 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

Total 

estimated 

savings or 

cost 

avoidance

U.S. Agency for International Development

Google/Email 1.17 1.47 2.29 4.93

Single Device 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.31

Telecommunications and Computer Operations Center 0.63 2.13 4.83 7.59

Public-facing Website Consolidation 1.54 1.54 1.54 4.62

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 3.44 5.24 8.76 17.44 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

eCPIC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

USACE Learning Network 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.50

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.50 

Veterans Affairs

Server Virtualization 0.42 0.75 1.10 2.28

Eliminate Dedicated Fax Servers Consolidation 0.36 9.72 45.00 55.08

Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement 40.00 40.00 40.00 120.00

Standardize Spend Planning and Consolidation Contracts 2.23 0.24 0.12 2.59

Vants Via Voice Over Internet Protocol 0.60 1.80 3.00 5.40

Vista Data Feeds 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.00

One CPU Policy 5.57 0.00 0.00 5.57

Total reported savings and cost avoidance 54.18 52.51 89.22 195.92 

Total reported savings and cost avoidance (all agencies) 610.87 d 1,023.84–1,025.14

954.96–

956.26

5,824.66–

7,927.26

Source: GAO analysis of agency data.

a

Defense did not provide information on the number of opportunities or potential cost savings to OMB 

in the cost target template. The information was obtained from the department’s final action plan and 

other referenced documentation. Defense reported savings for fiscal years 2012-2015 and did not 

break down cost savings by initiative.

b

n.d.—no data.

c

Justice did not provide information on the number of opportunities or potential cost savings to OMB 

in the cost target template. The information was obtained from the department’s final action plan. 

Justice reported savings for fiscal year 2015 and did not break down cost savings by initiative.

d

Numbers may not add up due to rounding.
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 62 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Agriculture direct the CIO to take the 

following four actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

Action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for wasteful, low-value, or 

duplicative investments. 

• As the department finalizes and matures its valuation methodology, 

utilize this process to identify whether there are additional 

opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value, or wasteful 

investments.

• Develop support for the estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 

through 2015 for the Cellular Phone Contract Consolidation, IT 

Infrastructure Consolidation/Enterprise Data Center Consolidation, 

and Geospatial Consolidation initiatives.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Commerce direct the CIO to take the 

following two actions:

• Reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the 

department’s enterprise architecture.

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the CIO to take the 

following three actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan element: consolidate commodity IT spending under the 

agency CIO. 

• Obtain support from the relevant component agencies for the 

estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 to 2015 for the data center 

Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Agriculture 

Commerce

Defense
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 63 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

consolidation, enterprise software purchasing, and General Fund 

Enterprise Business System initiatives. 

In addition, to improve the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ implementation 

of PortfolioStat, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the 

Secretary of the Army to take the following two actions:

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that 

support common business functions for consolidation; (3) establish 

criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments; 

and (4) establish a process to identify these potential investments and 

a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio.. 

• Report on the agency’s progress in consolidating eCPIC to a shared 

service as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly 

reporting until completed.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Energy direct the CIO to take the 

following action:

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, lowvalue, or duplicative investments. 

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency direct the 

CIO to take the following three actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending 

reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; and (3) establish 

criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments. 

• Report on the agency’s progress in consolidating the managed print 

services and strategic sourcing of end user computing to shared 

Energy

Environmental Protection 

Agency
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 64 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

services as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly 

reporting until completed.

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Administrator of the General Services Administration direct the 

CIO to take the following action:

• Report on the agency’s progress in consolidating the contract writing 

module to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data 

collection quarterly reporting until completed.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Health and Human Services direct the 

CIO to take the following action:

• In future OMB reporting, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan element: consolidate commodity IT spending under the 

agency CIO.

 

 

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development direct 

the CIO to take the following three actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan element: establish criteria for identifying wasteful, lowvalue, or duplicative investments.

• Report on the department’s progress in consolidating the HR End-toEnd Performance Management Module to a shared service as part of 

the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of the Interior direct the CIO to take the 

following three actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

General Services 

Administration 

Health and Human 

Services

Housing and Urban 

Development

Interior 
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 65 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan element: establish criteria for identifying wasteful, lowvalue, or duplicative investments. 

• Report on the department’s progress in consolidating the Electronic 

Forms System component of the eMail Enterprise Records & 

Document Management System deployment 8 to a shared service as 

part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until

completed.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Attorney General direct the CIO to take the following 

two actions:

• Reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the 

department’s enterprise architecture.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan element: establish targets for commodity IT spending 

reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets. 

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Labor direct the CIO to take the 

following three actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO and (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending 

reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets. 

• Report on the department’s progress in consolidating the cloud e-mail 

services to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data 

collection quarterly reporting until completed.

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration direct the CIO to take the following three actions: 

Justice

Labor 

National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 66 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• Reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the 

agency’s enterprise architecture.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that 

support common business functions for consolidation; (3) establish 

criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments; 

and (4) establish a process to identify these potential investments and 

a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio. 

• Report on the agency’s progress in consolidating the NASA Integrated 

Communications Services Consolidated Configuration Management 

System to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data 

collection quarterly reporting until completed.

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Archivist of the United States direct the CIO to take the following 

action:

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that 

support common business functions for consolidation; (3) establish 

criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments; 

and (4) establish a process to identify these potential investments and 

a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio. 

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Director of the National Science Foundation direct the CIO to take 

the following action: 

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, lowvalue, or duplicative investments.

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission direct the 

CIO to take the following two actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

National Archives and 

Records Administration 

National Science 

Foundation 

Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 67 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending 

reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; (3) target 

duplicative systems or contracts that support common business 

functions for consolidation; and (4) establish a process to identify 

these potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from 

the portfolio. 

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Director of the Office of Personnel Management direct the CIO to 

take the following three actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat

action plan elements: (1) move at least two commodity IT areas to 

shared services and (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that 

support common business functions for consolidation. 

• Report on the agency’s progress in consolidating the help desk 

consolidation and IT asset inventory to shared services as part of the 

OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Administrator of the Small Business Administration direct the CIO 

to take the following two actions:

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending 

reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; (3) target 

duplicative systems or contracts that support common business 

functions for consolidation; and (4) establish a process to identify 

those potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from 

the portfolio. 

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration direct the 

CIO to take the following two actions:

Office of Personnel 

Management

Small Business 

Administration 

Social Security 

Administration 
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 68 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• Report on the agency’s progress in consolidating the geospatial 

architecture to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data 

collection quarterly reporting until completed.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of State direct the CIO to take the 

following three actions:

• Reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the 

department’s enterprise architecture.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending 

reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; (3) move at least 

two commodity IT areas to shared services; (4) target duplicative 

systems or contracts that support common business functions for 

consolidation; and (5) establish a process to identify those potential 

investments and a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio. 

• Report on the department’s progress in consolidating the Foreign 

Affairs Network and content publishing and delivery services to 

shared services as part of the OMB integrated data collection 

quarterly reporting until completed.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Transportation direct the CIO to take the 

following two actions:

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending 

reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; (3) target 

duplicative systems or contracts that support common business 

functions for consolidation; and (4) establish a process to identify 

those potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from 

the portfolio. 

• Report on the department’s progress in consolidating the Enterprise 

Messaging to shared services as part of the OMB integrated data 

collection quarterly reporting until completed.

State 

Transportation 
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 69 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of the Treasury direct the CIO to take the 

following three actions:

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under 

the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, lowvalue, or duplicative investments. 

• As the department finalizes and matures its enterprise architecture 

and valuation methodology, utilize these processes to identify whether 

there are additional opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value, or 

wasteful investments.

• Develop support for the estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 to 

2015 for the DoNotPay Business Center, Fiscal IT Data Center 

Consolidation and Business Process Management Status initiatives.

To improve the agency’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we recommend 

that the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development 

direct the CIO to take the following four actions:

• Reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the 

agency’s enterprise architecture.

• Develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan elements: (1) target duplicative systems or contracts that 

support common business functions for consolidation and (2) 

establish a process to identify those potential investments and a 

schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio. 

• Report on the agency’s progress in consolidating the e-mail and 

Telecommunication and Operations Center to shared services as part 

of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until 

completed.

To improve the department’s implementation of PortfolioStat, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs direct the CIO to take 

the following four actions: 

Treasury

U.S. Agency for 

International Development

Veterans Affairs
Appendix IV: Recommendations to 

Departments and Agencies

Page 70 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

• In future reporting to OMB, fully describe the following PortfolioStat 

action plan element: target duplicative systems or contracts that 

support common business functions for consolidation. 

• Report on the department’s progress in consolidating the dedicated 

fax servers to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data 

collection quarterly reporting until completed.

• As the department matures its enterprise architecture process, make 

use of it, as well as the valuation model, to identify whether there are 

additional opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value, or wasteful 

investments.

• Develop detailed support for the estimated savings for fiscal years 

2013 to 2015 for the Server Virtualization, Eliminate Dedicated Fax 

Servers Consolidation, Renegotiate Microsoft Enterprise License 

Agreement, and one CPU policy initiatives.
Appendix V: Comments from the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture

Page 71 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix V: Comments from the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Commerce

Page 72 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix VI: Comments from the 

Department of Commerce
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Commerce

Page 73 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 74 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix VII: Comments from the 

Department of Defense
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 75 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 76 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department 

of Energy

Page 77 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix VIII: Comments from the 

Department of Energy
Appendix IX: Comments from the 

Environmental Protection Agency

Page 78 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix IX: Comments from the 

Environmental Protection Agency
Appendix IX: Comments from the 

Environmental Protection Agency

Page 79 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix IX: Comments from the 

Environmental Protection Agency

Page 80 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix X: Comments from the General 

Services Administration

Page 81 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix X: Comments from the General 

Services Administration
Appendix XI: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security

Page 82 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XI: Comments from the 

Department of Homeland Security 
Appendix XI: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security

Page 83 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XII: Comments from the Department 

of Housing and Urban Development

Page 84 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XII: Comments from the 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development
Appendix XIII: Comments from the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration

Page 85 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XIII: Comments from the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration
Appendix XIII: Comments from the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration

Page 86 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XIII: Comments from the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration

Page 87 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XIV: Comments from the National 

Archives and Records Administration

Page 88 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XIV: Comments from the National 

Archives and Records Administration
Appendix XV: Comments from the National Science 

Foundation

Page 89 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XV: Comments from the National 

Science Foundation
Appendix XVI: Comments from the Office of 

Personnel Management

Page 90 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XVI: Comments from the Office of 

Personnel Management
Appendix XVI: Comments from the Office of 

Personnel Management

Page 91 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XVII: Comments from the Social Security 

Administration

Page 92 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XVII: Comments from the Social 

Security Administration
Appendix XVII: Comments from the Social Security 

Administration

Page 93 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XIII: Comments from the Department 

of State

Page 94 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XIII: Comments from the 

Department of State
Appendix XIII: Comments from the Department 

of State

Page 95 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XIX: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs

Page 96 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

Appendix XIX: Comments from the 

Department of Veterans Affairs
Appendix XIX: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs

Page 97 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XIX: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs

Page 98 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XIX: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs

Page 99 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative
Appendix XX: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 100 GAO-14-65 OMB PortfolioStat Initiative

David A. Powner, (202) 512-9286 or pownerd@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, individuals making contributions 

to this report included Sabine Paul (Assistant Director), Valerie Hopkins, 

Lee McCracken, Tomas Ramirez, and Bradley Roach.

Appendix XX: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(311280)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.